Re: [libvirt] [PATCH 02/13] Rewrite virAtomic APIs using GLib's atomic ops code

2012-08-02 Thread Daniel P. Berrange
On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 06:09:13PM -0600, Eric Blake wrote: > On 07/31/2012 10:58 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > > From: "Daniel P. Berrange" > > > > There are a few issues with the current virAtomic APIs > > > > - They require use of a virAtomicInt struct instead of a plain > >int type >

Re: [libvirt] [PATCH 02/13] Rewrite virAtomic APIs using GLib's atomic ops code

2012-08-01 Thread Eric Blake
On 07/31/2012 06:09 PM, Eric Blake wrote: > On 07/31/2012 10:58 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: >> From: "Daniel P. Berrange" >> >> There are a few issues with the current virAtomic APIs >> >> - They require use of a virAtomicInt struct instead of a plain >>int type >> - Several of the methods

Re: [libvirt] [PATCH 02/13] Rewrite virAtomic APIs using GLib's atomic ops code

2012-07-31 Thread Eric Blake
On 07/31/2012 10:58 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > From: "Daniel P. Berrange" > > There are a few issues with the current virAtomic APIs > > - They require use of a virAtomicInt struct instead of a plain >int type > - Several of the methods do not implement memory barriers > - The method

[libvirt] [PATCH 02/13] Rewrite virAtomic APIs using GLib's atomic ops code

2012-07-31 Thread Daniel P. Berrange
From: "Daniel P. Berrange" There are a few issues with the current virAtomic APIs - They require use of a virAtomicInt struct instead of a plain int type - Several of the methods do not implement memory barriers - The methods do not implement compiler re-ordering barriers - There is no Wi