On Wed, 1 Mar 2023 19:43:34 +0100 Uros Bizjak <ubizjak@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wed, Mar 1, 2023 at 5:38 PM Steven Rostedt <rostedt@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On Wed, 1 Mar 2023 11:28:47 +0100 > > Uros Bizjak <ubizjak@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > These benefits are the reason the change to try_cmpxchg was accepted > > > also in the linear code elsewhere in the linux kernel, e.g. [2,3] to > > > name a few commits, with a thumbs-up and a claim that the new code is > > > actually *clearer* at the merge commit [4]. > > > > I'll say it here too. I really like Joel's suggestion of having a > > cmpxchg_success() that does not have the added side effect of modifying the > > old variable. > > > > I think that would allow for the arch optimizations that you are trying to > > achieve, as well as remove the side effect that might cause issues down the > > road. > > Attached patch implements this suggestion. I like it! Anyway to make this more generic? -- Steve
