[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [patch] RFC: A sys__test_and_set() implementation, 2nd iteration

To: Andreas Jaeger <>
Subject: Re: [patch] RFC: A sys__test_and_set() implementation, 2nd iteration
From: "Maciej W. Rozycki" <>
Date: Fri, 1 Jun 2001 16:21:26 +0200 (MET DST)
Cc:,, Ralf Baechle <>, Jun Sun <>
In-reply-to: <>
Organization: Technical University of Gdansk
On 1 Jun 2001, Andreas Jaeger wrote:

> We normally do not define anything to 0 - unless there's no other
> way.  And looking briefly over your code there should be other
> solutions.  Sorry, I'm limited in time currently, otherwise I would
> rewrite it myself.

 OK, I'll check how to write it better and still get good optimization
results.  Please don't bother writing it yourself -- we don't have any
kernel code yet, so there is no real need to get involved so much.

> Look at i386/lockf64.c for a cleaner example.

 Hmm, glibc rules certainly look different from Linux's ones -- I tried to
avoid interspersing real code with preprocessor conditionals.  Since you
state it's OK, I should have no problem with coding accrdingly.

> >  It's a syscall wrapper.  We want to export syscall wrappers, don't
> >  we? 
> No, not everything - we already export _test_and_set and that should
> be enough.

 OK, then.

+  Maciej W. Rozycki, Technical University of Gdansk, Poland   +
+        e-mail:, PGP key available        +

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>