lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [Dec]   [17]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: Are there u32 atomic bitops? (or dealing w/ i_flags)
On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 05:10:21PM -0800, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> I want to change inode->i_flags access to be atomic -- there are some
> locking oddities right now, I think, and I want to use a new inode
> flag to signal mtime updates from page_mkwrite. The problem is that
> i_flags is an unsigned int, and making it an unsigned long seems like
> a waste, but there aren't any u32 atomic bitops.

... and atomic accesses cost more. A lot more on some architectures.
FWIW, atomic_t *is* 32bit on 32bit architectures, which still doesn't
make it a good idea.


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2012-12-18 03:21    [W:0.097 / U:0.244 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site