Re: [PATCH v2 2/6] bitops: always define asm-generic non-atomic bitops

[Marco Elver]

On Mon, 13 Jun 2022 at 16:21, Alexander Lobakin
<alexandr.lobakin@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> From: Marco Elver <elver@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2022 18:32:36 +0200
>
> > On Fri, 10 Jun 2022 at 18:02, Luck, Tony <tony.luck@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > > > > +/**
> > > > > + * generic_test_bit - Determine whether a bit is set
> > > > > + * @nr: bit number to test
> > > > > + * @addr: Address to start counting from
> > > > > + */
> > > >
> > > > Shouldn't we add in this or in separate patch a big NOTE to explain that this
> > > > is actually atomic and must be kept as a such?
> > >
> > > "atomic" isn't really the right word. The volatile access makes sure that the
> > > compiler does the test at the point that the source code asked, and doesn't
> > > move it before/after other operations.
> >
> > It's listed in Documentation/atomic_bitops.txt.
>
> Oh, so my memory was actually correct that I saw it in the docs
> somewhere.
> WDYT, should I mention this here in the code (block comment) as well
> that it's atomic and must not lose `volatile` as Andy suggested or
> it's sufficient to have it in the docs (+ it's not underscored)?

Perhaps a quick comment in the code (not kerneldoc above) will be
sufficient, with reference to Documentation/atomic_bitops.txt.