From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-ig0-f181.google.com (mail-ig0-f181.google.com [209.85.213.181]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6C9746B0009 for ; Tue, 16 Feb 2016 11:10:57 -0500 (EST) Received: by mail-ig0-f181.google.com with SMTP id y8so80371656igp.1 for ; Tue, 16 Feb 2016 08:10:57 -0800 (PST) Received: from resqmta-ch2-03v.sys.comcast.net (resqmta-ch2-03v.sys.comcast.net. [2001:558:fe21:29:69:252:207:35]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id d14si3447683ioj.93.2016.02.16.08.10.56 for (version=TLS1_2 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Tue, 16 Feb 2016 08:10:56 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 16 Feb 2016 10:10:55 -0600 (CST) From: Christoph Lameter Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] Introduce atomic and per-cpu add-max and sub-min operations In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: <145544094056.28219.12239469516497703482.stgit@zurg> <20160214165133.GB3965@htj.duckdns.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Konstantin Khlebnikov Cc: Tejun Heo , linux-arch , Linux Kernel Mailing List , "linux-mm@kvack.org" , Andrew Morton On Sun, 14 Feb 2016, Konstantin Khlebnikov wrote: > Yep, they are just abstraction around cmpxchg, as well as a half of atomic > operations. Probably some architectures could implement this differently. Ok then use this_cpu_cmpxchg and cmpxchg to implement it instead? -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org