Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1763425AbXJYQsl (ORCPT ); Thu, 25 Oct 2007 12:48:41 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1762518AbXJYQmo (ORCPT ); Thu, 25 Oct 2007 12:42:44 -0400 Received: from www.tglx.de ([62.245.132.106]:42881 "EHLO www.tglx.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1762774AbXJYQmn (ORCPT ); Thu, 25 Oct 2007 12:42:43 -0400 Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2007 18:42:32 +0200 (CEST) From: Thomas Gleixner To: Randy Dunlap cc: Nick Piggin , mingo@redhat.com, hpa@zytor.com, lkml , torvalds , akpm Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] bitops kernel-doc: inline instead of macro In-Reply-To: <20071025093159.3ea69d03.rdunlap@xenotime.net> Message-ID: References: <20071023220959.a359d57d.rdunlap@xenotime.net> <200710241800.19764.nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au> <20071025093159.3ea69d03.rdunlap@xenotime.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 3267 Lines: 99 On Thu, 25 Oct 2007, Randy Dunlap wrote: > On Wed, 24 Oct 2007 18:00:19 +1000 Nick Piggin wrote: > > > On Wednesday 24 October 2007 15:09, Randy Dunlap wrote: > > > From: Randy Dunlap > > > > > > Can we expand this macro definition, or should I look for a way to > > > fool^W teach kernel-doc about this? > > > > > > scripts/kernel-doc says: > > > Error(linux-2.6.24-rc1//include/asm-x86/bitops_32.h:188): cannot understand > > > prototype: 'test_and_set_bit_lock test_and_set_bit ' > > > > Actually, it probably looks a bit nicer like this anyway. If you grep > > for it, then you can actually see the parameters... > > > > On third thoughts, an inline function might be the best thing to do, > > and also avoid setting a bad example. What do you think? > > --- > > From: Randy Dunlap > > Use duplicated inline functions for test_and_set_bit_lock() on x86 > instead of #define macros, thus avoiding a bad example. This allows > kernel-doc to run cleanly instead of terminating with an error: Hmm, can we simply do static inline int test_and_set_bit_lock(int nr, volatile unsigned long * addr) { return test_and_set_bit(nr, addr); } please ? tglx > Error(linux-2.6.24-rc1//include/asm-x86/bitops_32.h:188): cannot understand prototype: 'test_and_set_bit_lock test_and_set_bit ' > > Signed-off-by: Randy Dunlap > --- > include/asm-x86/bitops_32.h | 13 +++++++++++-- > include/asm-x86/bitops_64.h | 13 +++++++++++-- > 2 files changed, 22 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > > --- linux-2.6.24-rc1.orig/include/asm-x86/bitops_32.h > +++ linux-2.6.24-rc1/include/asm-x86/bitops_32.h > @@ -183,9 +183,18 @@ static inline int test_and_set_bit(int n > * @nr: Bit to set > * @addr: Address to count from > * > - * This is the same as test_and_set_bit on x86 > + * This is the same as test_and_set_bit on x86. > */ > -#define test_and_set_bit_lock test_and_set_bit > +static inline int test_and_set_bit_lock(int nr, volatile unsigned long * addr) > +{ > + int oldbit; > + > + __asm__ __volatile__( LOCK_PREFIX > + "btsl %2,%1\n\tsbbl %0,%0" > + :"=r" (oldbit),"+m" (ADDR) > + :"Ir" (nr) : "memory"); > + return oldbit; > +} > > /** > * __test_and_set_bit - Set a bit and return its old value > --- linux-2.6.24-rc1.orig/include/asm-x86/bitops_64.h > +++ linux-2.6.24-rc1/include/asm-x86/bitops_64.h > @@ -173,9 +173,18 @@ static __inline__ int test_and_set_bit(i > * @nr: Bit to set > * @addr: Address to count from > * > - * This is the same as test_and_set_bit on x86 > + * This is the same as test_and_set_bit on x86. > */ > -#define test_and_set_bit_lock test_and_set_bit > +static __inline__ int test_and_set_bit_lock(int nr, volatile void * addr) > +{ > + int oldbit; > + > + __asm__ __volatile__( LOCK_PREFIX > + "btsl %2,%1\n\tsbbl %0,%0" > + :"=r" (oldbit),ADDR > + :"dIr" (nr) : "memory"); > + return oldbit; > +} > > /** > * __test_and_set_bit - Set a bit and return its old value > - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/