[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH] atomic: add *_dec_not_zero

To: "David Laight" <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] atomic: add *_dec_not_zero
From: Sven Eckelmann <>
Date: Wed, 4 May 2011 10:21:16 +0200
Cc:,,,,,,,,,, "Chris Metcalf" <>, "David Howells" <>,,,,,,,
Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple;; s=mail; t=1304497298; bh=8KC/VAUU532yNdFbGxPYeuJANlG8AfOjjawVUtjP0rs=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:Cc:References:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Message-Id; b=NsSunp2Mfpofv5VUKaQUK7rWXK3J92ip8xpFeDvZbhcyptSDVpa+doQoWFVdCUqrM gscCgcXf7UIpcMmBaiE0nUxvcPMaD8/vRWL942MKxyy8XS27AAj55C0Wc4Mnl9lh9r ZPv82XsaqDx+84OOvGT/o1M5WBCwKapSJgkfx0gE=
In-reply-to: <>
Original-recipient: rfc822;
References: <>
User-agent: KMail/1.13.5 (Linux/2.6.38-2-686; KDE/4.4.5; i686; ; )
On Wednesday 04 May 2011 10:05:53 David Laight wrote:
> > Introduce an *_dec_not_zero operation.  Make this a special case of
> > *_add_unless because batman-adv uses atomic_dec_not_zero in different
> > places like re-broadcast queue or aggregation queue management. There
> > are other non-final patches which may also want to use this macro.
> Isn't there a place where a default definition of this can be
> defined? Instead of adding it separately to every architecture.

Not that I would know about such a place - and all other atomic* macro 
definitions also suggest that there is no such place.

Kind regards,

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

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