On 06/08/2013 04:02 PM, Chen Gang wrote:
> On 06/08/2013 03:31 PM, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>> > On 06/07/2013 11:30 PM, Chen Gang wrote:
>>>> >> > 
>>>> >> > atomic_set_mask() has already have 'unsigned' type case, and
>>>> >> > atomic_clear_mask() is the pair of atomic_set_mask().
>>>> >> > 
>>>> >> > So it also need 'unsigned' type case.
>>>> >> > 
>> > Pray tell, in what situation does this matter?  The only reason I can
>> > think of is if "mask" is actually a long...
> Excuse me, in fact, I don't know whether it will cause issue. Since
> atomic_set_mask() has done, I think atomic_clear_mask() also need it.
> 
> If atomic_clear_mask() do need it, the atomic_set_mask() do not need it
> either, they are the pairs --> they will face the same situation.

Oh, my typo, it should be "If atomic_clear_mask() do not need it, the
atomic_set_mask() do not need it either, the are face same situation".


Thanks.
-- 
Chen Gang

Asianux Corporation
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Reply via email to