On Sat, Dec 25, 2010 at 11:35 AM, Ted Unangst <ted.unangst@gmail.com> wrote:
quoted text
> On Sat, Dec 25, 2010 at 2:12 PM, Philip Guenther <guenther@gmail.com>
wrote:
quoted text
>> Fix the naming of the atomic macros on amd64: right now, the
>> x86_atomic_*_l() macros actually operate on unsigned 32bit integers
>> instead of longs, so:
>> 1) change the callers to use the _u32 versions
>> 2) update the _ul definitions to bew the 64bit versions
>> 3) remove the _l macros
>>
>> Open question: perhaps the _ul macros should be removed too (they're
>> unused after this diff) and future code should just explicitly use the
>> _u32 or _u64 macros?
>
> This looks good, but I think we should delete the ul macro too.  There
> should be very few "long" types running around in the kernel.

That's simple enough, it just means deleting three '+' lines from the
atomic.h part of the diff, deleting the _l and _ul macros and leaving
just the x86_atomic_testset_i() macro (which is only used in lock.h).
I'm fine with that.

oks?


Philip Guenther