Hi Julien,
On 7/13/2016 3:14 PM, Julien Grall wrote:
Hi Corneliu,
On 13/07/2016 12:23, Corneliu ZUZU wrote:
Following Andrew Cooper's suggestion, create a common-side
<xen/atomic.h> to
establish, among others, prototypes of atomic functions called from
common-code.
Done to avoid introducing inconsistencies between arch-side
<asm/atomic.h>
headers when we make subtle changes to one of them.
Some arm-side macros had to be turned into inline functions in the
process.
You forgot to mention that you moved the code from
asm-arm/arm{32,64}/atomic.h to asm-arm/arm.h.
Furthermore, this change should really be a separate patch.
Noted, will do.
Also includes a minor adjustment asm-x86/atomic.h: reorder
atomic_inc_and_test()
to follow after atomic_inc().
Signed-off-by: Corneliu ZUZU <cz...@bitdefender.com>
[...]
diff --git a/xen/include/asm-arm/atomic.h b/xen/include/asm-arm/atomic.h
index 29ab265..8e8c5d1 100644
--- a/xen/include/asm-arm/atomic.h
+++ b/xen/include/asm-arm/atomic.h
@@ -2,6 +2,7 @@
#define __ARCH_ARM_ATOMIC__
#include <xen/config.h>
+#include <xen/atomic.h>
#include <xen/prefetch.h>
#include <asm/system.h>
@@ -95,15 +96,6 @@ void __bad_atomic_size(void);
default: __bad_atomic_size();
break; \
} \
})
-
-/*
- * NB. I've pushed the volatile qualifier into the operations. This
allows
- * fast accessors such as _atomic_read() and _atomic_set() which
don't give
- * the compiler a fit.
- */
-typedef struct { int counter; } atomic_t;
-
-#define ATOMIC_INIT(i) { (i) }
/*
* On ARM, ordinary assignment (str instruction) doesn't clear the
local
@@ -138,6 +130,85 @@ static inline void _atomic_set(atomic_t *v, int i)
# error "unknown ARM variant"
#endif
+#define atomic_inc_return(v) (atomic_add_return(1, v))
+#define atomic_dec_return(v) (atomic_sub_return(1, v))
+
+/**
+ * atomic_sub_and_test - subtract value from variable and test result
+ * @i: integer value to subtract
+ * @v: pointer of type atomic_t
+ *
+ * Atomically subtracts @i from @v and returns
+ * true if the result is zero, or false for all
+ * other cases.
+ */
+static inline int atomic_sub_and_test(int i, atomic_t *v)
+{
+ return 0 == atomic_sub_return(i, v);
+}
Please don't use yoda condition. It's less readable and compiler have
safety nowadays to prevent using "=".
Oh yeah, given that Xen's compiled with -Wall -Werror that's not
necessary. Ack.
+
+/**
+ * atomic_inc - increment atomic variable
+ * @v: pointer of type atomic_t
+ *
+ * Atomically increments @v by 1.
+ */
+static inline void atomic_inc(atomic_t *v)
+{
+ atomic_add(1, v);
+}
Regards,
Thanks,
Corneliu.
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel