On Fri, Dec 09, 2022 at 04:48:39PM +0100, Andrzej Hajda wrote: > The pattern of setting variable with new value and returning old > one is very common in kernel. Usually atomicity of the operation > is not required, so xchg seems to be suboptimal and confusing in > such cases. Since name xchg is already in use and __xchg is used > in architecture code, proposition is to name the macro exchange. > > Signed-off-by: Andrzej Hajda <andrzej.hajda@xxxxxxxxx> > --- > Hi, > > I hope there will be place for such tiny helper in kernel. > Quick cocci analyze shows there is probably few thousands places > where it could be used, of course I do not intend to do it :). > > I was not sure where to put this macro, I hope near swap definition > is the most suitable place. Ah, swap() in this context is not the same. minmax.h hosts it because it's often related to the swap function in the sort-type algorithms. > Moreover sorry if to/cc is not correct - get_maintainers.pl was > more confused than me, to who address this patch. ... > include/linux/minmax.h | 14 ++++++++++++++ Does it really suit this header? I would expect something else. Maybe include/linux/non-atomic/xchg.h, dunno. Btw, have you looked if Ingo's gigantic series have done anything to cmpxchg.h and related headers? Maybe some ideas can be taken from there? -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko
