[PATCH 5/5] x86: Define atomic_compare_and_exchange_{val,bool}_acq using __atomic_compare_exchange_n

[Adhemerval Zanella Netto]

On 10/09/25 13:59, Wilco Dijkstra wrote:
> Hi Uros,
> 
>>> However, it looks that after [1] gets committed, these macros should
>>> be removed from target headers.
>>>
>>> I will wait a couple of days for dust to settle, and I'll respin the series.
>>>
>>> [1] https://sourceware.org/pipermail/libc-alpha/2025-September/169942.html
>>
>> I think it should be fine, I working on top of the Wilco patches to cleanup
>> even more internal atomic builtins and I think both patchsets do not
>> interfere with each other.
> 
> My patch series has gone in, so these definitions are now redundant: 
> 
> #define atomic_compare_and_exchange_val_acq(mem, newval, oldval)        \
> 
> #define atomic_compare_and_exchange_bool_acq(mem, newval, oldval)       \
> 
> #define atomic_exchange_acq(mem, newvalue) \
> 
> #define catomic_exchange_and_add(mem, value) \

Yeap, I am preparing a patchset to cleanup atomic.h/atomic-machine.h even more.