From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S265502AbUBPNLb (ORCPT ); Mon, 16 Feb 2004 08:11:31 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S265513AbUBPNLb (ORCPT ); Mon, 16 Feb 2004 08:11:31 -0500 Received: from ddc.ilcddc.com ([12.35.229.4]:57095 "EHLO ddcnyntd.ddc-ny.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S265502AbUBPNL3 (ORCPT ); Mon, 16 Feb 2004 08:11:29 -0500 Message-ID: <89760D3F308BD41183B000508BAFAC4104B16F79@DDCNYNTD> From: RANDAZZO@ddc-web.com To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: what to use (sem/spinlock/etc).... Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2004 08:10:16 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2656.59) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org I have a register on my hardware that I write to to increment a counter.... ..all I want to do is make sure that only one "task" writes at a time, thus to not corrupt the value...... =EXAMPLE Task A - Write new Value to hardware - Increment Hardware counter - DONE Task B - Write new Value to hardware - Increment Hardware counter - DONE ..This will most likely not occur in a inthandler, but may.... ...I have to make sure that Task A is "done" before "Task B" or any others can do their writing.... ...any opinion of what I should use.... "This message may contain company proprietary information. If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, distribution or reliance on the contents of this message is prohibited. If you received this message in error, please delete and notify me."