RE: [PATCH 1/12] generic *_bit()

[Chen, Kenneth W]

Christoph Hellwig wrote on Wednesday, February 01, 2006 10:03 AM
> > Akinobu Mita wrote on Wednesday, January 25, 2006 7:29 PM
> > > This patch introduces the C-language equivalents of the functions below:
> > > 
> > > - atomic operation:
> > > void set_bit(int nr, volatile unsigned long *addr);
> > > void clear_bit(int nr, volatile unsigned long *addr);
> > > void change_bit(int nr, volatile unsigned long *addr);
> > > int test_and_set_bit(int nr, volatile unsigned long *addr);
> > > int test_and_clear_bit(int nr, volatile unsigned long *addr);
> > > int test_and_change_bit(int nr, volatile unsigned long *addr);
> > 
> > I wonder why you did not make these functions take volatile
> > unsigned int * address argument?
> 
> Because they are defined to operate on arrays of unsigned long

I think these should be defined to operate on arrays of unsigned int.
Bit is a bit, no matter how many byte you load (8/16/32/64), you can
only operate on just one bit.

- Ken

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/