On Wed, 1 Mar 2023 12:36:45 -0800 "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Some years down the road, should cmpxchg_success() be on the tip of > the tongue of every kernel hacker, perhaps. Or perhaps not. A bit of a catch-22 I would say. It will only become something everyone knows if it exists. > > In the meantime, we have yet another abysmally documented atomic Is it? > operation that is not well known throughout the community. And then the > people coming across this curse everyone who had anything to do with it, > as they search the source code, dig through assembly output, and so on > trying to work out exactly what this thing does. > > Sorry, but no way. > > Again, unless there is some sort of forward-progress argument or > similar convincing argument. Speaking of forward progress... https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/Documentation/atomic_t.txt#n316 Anyway, I'm guessing this will not become part of rcu any time soon. But for the ring buffer, I would happily take it. -- Steve
