On Fri, Jul 10, 2015 at 02:42:56PM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > The obvious question though is whether we have an established name for this > operation elsewhere in the kernel, and whether we should have consistency. Consistency is good. > In include/linux, we already have (grepping for 'and_*not'): > > include/linux/nodemask.h:#define nodes_andnot(dst, src1, src2) \ > include/linux/bitmap.h:extern int __bitmap_andnot(unsigned long *dst, const unsigned long *bitmap1, > include/linux/cpumask.h:static inline int cpumask_andnot(struct cpumask *dstp, > > We also have: > > include/linux/signal.h:#define _sig_andn(x,y) ((x) & ~(y)) > > which seems to be the only instance of "andn" in include/. How about I rename the _sig_andn one to _sig_andnot, and go with atomic_andnot, to match the *mask functions. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arch" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
