[Bug translator/6932] c->busy can be non-atomic.

[fche at redhat dot com]

------- Additional Comments From fche at redhat dot com  2008-11-13 14:39 -------
> By the way, for reentrancy-prevention, we don't need an atomic-operation,
> because the reentrance always occurs on the same processor...

Yes, but a nonatomic increment would not be protected against
interrupts/preemption.

-- 


http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=6932

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.