Re: [tip:x86/asm] x86, bitops: Change bitops to be native operand size

[H. Peter Anvin]

Yes, on the generic it is int.

The problem is in part that some architectures have bitop instructions with specific behavior.

Joe Perches <joe@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>On Tue, 2013-07-16 at 18:15 -0700, tip-bot for H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>> Commit-ID:  9b710506a03b01a9fdd83962912bc9d8237b82e8
>[]
>> x86, bitops: Change bitops to be native operand size
>> 
>> Change the bitops operation to be naturally "long", i.e. 63 bits on
>> the 64-bit kernel.  Additional bugs are likely to crop up in the
>> future.
>
>> We already have bugs which machines with > 16 TiB of memory in a
>> single node, as can happen if memory is interleaved.  The x86 bitop
>> operations take a signed index, so using an unsigned type is not an
>> option.
>
>I think it odd that any bitop index nr should be
>anything other than unsigned long for any arch.
>
>Why should this arch be any different than the
>defined type in Documentation/atomic_ops.txt?
>
>What value is a negative index when the bitmap
>array address passed is the starting 0th bit?
>
>btw: asm-generic/bitops.h doesn't match
>Documentation/atomic_ops.txt either.

-- 
Sent from my mobile phone.  Please pardon brevity and lack of formatting.
--
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/