On Sun, Jan 18, 2026 at 10:57:37PM +0800, Boqun Feng wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 18, 2026 at 09:38:36AM +0100, Dirk Behme wrote:
> [...]
> > >
> > > +// The current helpers of load/store uses `{WRITE,READ}_ONCE()` hence
> > > the atomicity is only
> >
> > uses -> use ?
> >
>
> Will fix, thank you!
>
> > > +// guaranteed against read-modify-write operations if the architecture
> > > supports native atomic RmW.
> > > +#[cfg(CONFIG_ARCH_SUPPORTS_ATOMIC_RMW)]
> > > +impl AtomicImpl for *const c_void {
> > > + type Delta = isize;
> > > +}
> >
> > Are all users of this guarded with CONFIG_ARCH_SUPPORTS_ATOMIC_RMW as
> > well? Or do we want (need?) to cover the
>
> No, the users don't need to guard with CONFIG_ARCH_SUPPORTS_ATOMIC_RMW,
> the purpose of this #[cfg] is to avoid surprise that when
> CONFIG_ARCH_SUPPORTS_ATOMIC_RMW=n arch supports Rust, when that happens,
> we need to add the support to the helpers of i8/i16/ptr.
>
Hmm... I guess at this moment, I probably should do
#[cfg(not(CONFIG_ARCH_SUPPORTS_ATOMIC_RMW))]
static_assert!(false,
"Support of architectures that don't have native atomic needs to
implement helpers in atomic_ext.c");
I can add a patch in the next version if it looks good to everyone.
Regards,
Boqun
> > non-CONFIG_ARCH_SUPPORTS_ATOMIC_RMW cases where someone tries to use
>
> Note that these arches are very rare, so we might not have any problem
> for a while.
>
> Regards,
> Boqun
>
> > this as well?
> >
> > Best regards
> >
> > Dirk
> >
> >
> >
