> On Feb 24, 2019, at 9:12 AM, Joerg Sonnenberger <[email protected]> wrote: > > I'm far more inclined to just want the limited API with as many > constraints as reasonable, e.g. an atomic 32bit fetch or store and > that's it. Maybe add 64bit variants, but no more. No point really in > having a lot of dead weight around. 32-bit on every platform, and 64-bit on LP64 platforms (for pointers). I’m fine with that, so long as we’re willing to “give up” on the other things that use byte / short / in-interrupt. -- thorpej
- Re: RFC: New userspace f... Jason Thorpe
- Re: RFC: New userspace fetch/store API Robert Elz
- Re: RFC: New userspace fetch/store API Jason Thorpe
- Re: RFC: New userspace fetch/store API Edgar Fuß
- Re: RFC: New userspace fetch/store API Jason Thorpe
- Re: RFC: New userspace fetch/store API Andrew Cagney
- Re: RFC: New userspace fetch/store API Jason Thorpe
- Re: RFC: New userspace fetch/store API Andrew Cagney
- Re: RFC: New userspace fetch/store API Jason Thorpe
- Re: RFC: New userspace fetch/store API Joerg Sonnenberger
- Re: RFC: New userspace fetch/store API Jason Thorpe
- Re: RFC: New userspace fetch/store API Jason Thorpe
- Re: RFC: New userspace fetch/store AP... Brian Buhrow
- Re: RFC: New userspace fetch/stor... Jason Thorpe
- Re: RFC: New userspace fetch/store API Mindaugas Rasiukevicius
- Re: RFC: New userspace fetch/store API Jason Thorpe
- Re: RFC: New userspace fetch/store API Mindaugas Rasiukevicius
- Re: RFC: New userspace fetch/store API Eduardo Horvath
- Re: RFC: New userspace fetch/store API Andrew Cagney
- Re: RFC: New userspace fetch/store API Eduardo Horvath
