On Tue, May 01, 2007 at 11:12:11PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > Not sure about that point. If you need to do atomic operations on the > first 32 bits, you shouldn't need to invent your own abstractions for > those, and it's highly unlikely that the implementation of atomic_t changes.
I disagree. Using an atomic_t in a hardware structure is against all the abstractions we've built. It's much better to have separate macros to atomically modify a word in this hardware strcuture, even if they end up exactly the same as the atomic_ macros - at least this way we clearly document their intent. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now. http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/ _______________________________________________ kvm-devel mailing list kvm-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/kvm-devel
