LKML Archive on lore.kernel.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
To: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@polymtl.ca>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@suse.de>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
	ltt-dev@shafik.org, systemtap@sources.redhat.com,
	Douglas Niehaus <niehaus@eecs.ku.edu>,
	"Martin J. Bligh" <mbligh@mbligh.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] atomic.h : standardizing atomic primitives
Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2007 17:36:03 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1170261363.9516.50.camel@twins> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20070131162539.GA31985@Krystal>

On Wed, 2007-01-31 at 11:25 -0500, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> Hi Peter,
> 
> Thanks for testing Andrew's fixes.

I haven't actually taken any from him. I just started afresh.

>  I am wondering about what happened to
> the Powerpc recursive include problems Andrew experienced. Quoting him :
> 
> "OK, I fixed eight separate compile errors in this patch series and
> now powerpc is being very ugly with a twisty maze of include
> dependencies.
> 
> I'm giving up.  Someone should publish a suite of cross-compilers for us
> so stuff like this doesn't need to happen."
> 
> I see that you have removed the include <asm/atomic.h> from bitops.h and
> system.h in powerpc. If it compiles on every architectures, then it's a
> good approach.

Yeah, I fiddled around with those powerpc headers a bit until it stopped
whining. Maybe the powerpc folks ought to eyeball it a bit, but it build
a kernel image here.

> I planned to post a new patch which uses macros for cmpxchg and xchg in
> asm-generic/atomic.h instead of inline functions. It would remove the
> dependency on system.h. However, if your modifications work well on
> every architecture, my fix might not be needed. Anyone has a preferred
> solution ? I have not been able to setup my cross-compiler test bench
> yet due to some hardware issues and waited for it before I released
> further fixes, but if you want to try my macro-based fix, I could post
> it.

Whatever people want; inlines are generally preferred due to the extra
type checking.

I just needed atomic_long_cmpxchg to work so I kicked your patches about
till they compiled.

> And about the alpha build, Does the assembler errors also happen without
> this patch ?

Yes. Something fishy going on there... gcc-4.1.1 + binutils-2.17
Compiler seems to build fine, but kernel code makes it go belly up.



      reply	other threads:[~2007-01-31 16:36 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2007-01-12  1:35 [PATCH 00/09] " Mathieu Desnoyers
2007-01-12  1:35 ` [PATCH 01/09] atomic.h : Add atomic64 cmpxchg, xchg and add_unless to alpha Mathieu Desnoyers
2007-01-12  1:35 ` [PATCH 02/09] atomic.h : Complete atomic_long operations in asm-generic Mathieu Desnoyers
2007-01-12  1:35 ` [PATCH 03/09] atomic.h : i386 type safety fix Mathieu Desnoyers
2007-01-12  1:35 ` [PATCH 04/09] atomic.h : Add atomic64 cmpxchg, xchg and add_unless to ia64 Mathieu Desnoyers
2007-01-12  1:35 ` [PATCH 05/09] atomic.h : Add atomic64 cmpxchg, xchg and add_unless to mips Mathieu Desnoyers
2007-01-12  1:35 ` [PATCH 06/09] atomic.h : Add atomic64 cmpxchg, xchg and add_unless to parisc Mathieu Desnoyers
2007-01-12  1:35 ` [PATCH 07/09] atomic.h : Add atomic64 cmpxchg, xchg and add_unless to powerpc Mathieu Desnoyers
2007-01-12  1:35 ` [PATCH 08/09] atomic.h : Add atomic64 cmpxchg, xchg and add_unless to sparc64 Mathieu Desnoyers
2007-01-12  1:35 ` [PATCH 09/09] atomic.h : Add atomic64 cmpxchg, xchg and add_unless to x86_64 Mathieu Desnoyers
2007-01-31 15:28 ` [PATCH] atomic.h : standardizing atomic primitives Peter Zijlstra
2007-01-31 16:25   ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2007-01-31 16:36     ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=1170261363.9516.50.camel@twins \
    --to=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
    --cc=akpm@osdl.org \
    --cc=gregkh@suse.de \
    --cc=hch@infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=ltt-dev@shafik.org \
    --cc=mathieu.desnoyers@polymtl.ca \
    --cc=mbligh@mbligh.org \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=niehaus@eecs.ku.edu \
    --cc=systemtap@sources.redhat.com \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=torvalds@osdl.org \
    --subject='Re: [PATCH] atomic.h : standardizing atomic primitives' \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).