On 5/4/07 16:56, "Keir Fraser" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> On 5/4/07 16:44, "Hollis Blanchard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
>> This is an interface problem: using the interface in a way that works on
>> x86 fails on other architectures. PLEASE let's redefine the interface to
>> prevent this from happening. In this case, that means replacing the
>> xchg() macro with
>>         static inline xchg(atomic_t *ptr, atomic_t val)
>> and changing the type of 'is_dying'.
> 
> Just need to define bool_t appropriately. What do you need: a long?

Does PowerPC support atomic byte loads and stores by the way (i.e.,
concurrent loads and stores to adjacent bytes by different processors do not
conflict with each other)? In which case it might be worth keeping bool_t
and defining atomic_bool_t or atomic_rmw_bool_t for bools that need to be
atomically read-modified-written. That would avoid bloating critical
structures for the few bools that need atomic r-m-w semantics.

 -- Keir


_______________________________________________
Xen-ppc-devel mailing list
Xen-ppc-devel@lists.xensource.com
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-ppc-devel

Reply via email to