On Tue, Jun 11, 2024 at 03:38:12PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote: > Linus Walleij pointed out that a new comer might be confused about the > difference between set_bit() and __set_bit(). Add a comment explaining > the difference. > > Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/CACRpkdZFPG_YLici-BmYfk9HZ36f4WavCN3JNotkk8cPgCODCg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx/ > Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@xxxxxxxxxx> > --- > v2: re-word the comment, put it right next to the macros and add a blank > line in front of the test_bit() macros so it's not mixed in with the > non-atomic macros > > include/linux/bitops.h | 5 +++++ > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/include/linux/bitops.h b/include/linux/bitops.h > index 46d4bdc634c0..ba35bbf07798 100644 > --- a/include/linux/bitops.h > +++ b/include/linux/bitops.h > @@ -47,12 +47,17 @@ extern unsigned long __sw_hweight64(__u64 w); > __builtin_constant_p(*(const unsigned long *)(addr))) ? \ > const##op(nr, addr) : op(nr, addr)) > > +/* > + * The following macros are non-atomic versions of their non-underscored > + * counterparts. > + */ > #define __set_bit(nr, addr) bitop(___set_bit, nr, addr) > #define __clear_bit(nr, addr) bitop(___clear_bit, nr, addr) > #define __change_bit(nr, addr) bitop(___change_bit, nr, addr) > #define __test_and_set_bit(nr, addr) bitop(___test_and_set_bit, nr, addr) > #define __test_and_clear_bit(nr, addr) bitop(___test_and_clear_bit, nr, addr) > #define __test_and_change_bit(nr, addr) bitop(___test_and_change_bit, nr, addr) > + > #define test_bit(nr, addr) bitop(_test_bit, nr, addr) > #define test_bit_acquire(nr, addr) bitop(_test_bit_acquire, nr, addr) > > -- > 2.39.2 Applied in bitmap-for-next. For the next time please make the subject prefix [PATCH v2], then [PATCH v3], and so on. The motivation is to avoid sending emails with identical subjects as some (not mine) email clients consider one as a reply to another. Thanks, Yury
