Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/5] arch: atomic rework

[Paul E. McKenney]

On Thu, Feb 06, 2014 at 06:25:49PM +0000, David Howells wrote:
> 
> Is it worth considering a move towards using C11 atomics and barriers and
> compiler intrinsics inside the kernel?  The compiler _ought_ to be able to do
> these.

Makes sense to me!

> One thing I'm not sure of, though, is how well gcc's atomics will cope with
> interrupt handlers touching atomics on CPUs without suitable atomic
> instructions - that said, userspace does have to deal with signals getting
> underfoot. but then userspace can't normally disable interrupts.

Perhaps make the C11 definitions so that any arch can override any
specific definition?

							Thanx, Paul

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