Re: Are there u32 atomic bitops? (or dealing w/ i_flags)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 05:10:21PM -0800, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> I want to change inode->i_flags access to be atomic -- there are some
> locking oddities right now, I think, and I want to use a new inode
> flag to signal mtime updates from page_mkwrite.  The problem is that
> i_flags is an unsigned int, and making it an unsigned long seems like
> a waste, but there aren't any u32 atomic bitops.

... and atomic accesses cost more.  A lot more on some architectures.
FWIW, atomic_t *is* 32bit on 32bit architectures, which still doesn't
make it a good idea.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html


[Index of Archives]     [Linux Ext4 Filesystem]     [Union Filesystem]     [Filesystem Testing]     [Ceph Users]     [Ecryptfs]     [AutoFS]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Share Photos]     [Security]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux Cachefs]     [Reiser Filesystem]     [Linux RAID]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]     [CEPH Development]
  Powered by Linux