From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sun, 21 Jul 2002 08:34:36 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sun, 21 Jul 2002 08:34:36 -0400 Received: from pc2-cwma1-5-cust12.swa.cable.ntl.com ([80.5.121.12]:35317 "EHLO irongate.swansea.linux.org.uk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Sun, 21 Jul 2002 08:34:35 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH] generalized spin_lock_bit From: Alan Cox To: "David S. Miller" Cc: rml@tech9.net, Linus Torvalds , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, riel@conectiva.com.br, wli@holomorphy.com In-Reply-To: <20020720.183133.67807986.davem@redhat.com> References: <1027196511.1555.767.camel@sinai> <20020720.152703.102669295.davem@redhat.com> <1027211185.17234.48.camel@irongate.swansea.linux.org.uk> <20020720.183133.67807986.davem@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.0.3 (1.0.3-6) Date: 21 Jul 2002 14:48:54 +0100 Message-Id: <1027259334.16819.98.camel@irongate.swansea.linux.org.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sun, 2002-07-21 at 02:31, David S. Miller wrote: > For an asm-generic/bitlock.h implementation it is more than > fine. That way we get asm-i386/bitlock.h that does whatever > it wants to do and the rest of asm-*/bitlock.h includes > the generic version until the arch maintainer sees fit to > do otherwise. For an asm-generic one yes. Although you do need to add a cpu_relax() in the inner loop Alan