On Thu, Dec 22, 2022 at 12:46:34PM +0100, Andrzej Hajda wrote:
> The pattern of setting variable with new value and returning old
> one is very common in kernel. Usually atomicity of the operation
> is not required, so xchg seems to be suboptimal and confusing in
> such cases.
FWIW,
Reviewed-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
> Signed-off-by: Andrzej Hajda <andrzej.hajda@intel.com>
> ---
> include/linux/non-atomic/xchg.h | 19 +++++++++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 19 insertions(+)
> create mode 100644 include/linux/non-atomic/xchg.h
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/non-atomic/xchg.h b/include/linux/non-atomic/xchg.h
> new file mode 100644
> index 00000000000000..f7fa5dd746f37d
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/include/linux/non-atomic/xchg.h
> @@ -0,0 +1,19 @@
> +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 */
> +#ifndef _LINUX_NON_ATOMIC_XCHG_H
> +#define _LINUX_NON_ATOMIC_XCHG_H
> +
> +/**
> + * __xchg - set variable pointed by @ptr to @val, return old value
> + * @ptr: pointer to affected variable
> + * @val: value to be written
> + *
> + * This is non-atomic variant of xchg.
> + */
> +#define __xchg(ptr, val) ({ \
> + __auto_type __ptr = ptr; \
> + __auto_type __t = *__ptr; \
> + *__ptr = (val); \
> + __t; \
> +})
> +
> +#endif
> --
> 2.34.1
>
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko