Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 10 Jul 2001 09:48:27 +0000 | From | Studierende der Universitaet des Saarlandes <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] sym53c8xx timer rework |
| |
> /* > -** Stop the ncr_timeout process > -** Set release_stage to 1 and wait that ncr_timeout() set it to 2. > +** Stop the ncr_timeout process - lock it to ensure no timer is running > +** on a different CPU, or anything > */ > - np->release_stage = 1; > - for (i = 50 ; i && np->release_stage != 2 ; i--) MDELAY (100); > - if (np->release_stage != 2) > - printk("%s: the timer seems to be already stopped\n", > - ncr_name(np)); > - else np->release_stage = 2; > + NCR_LOCK_NCB(np, flags); > + del_timer(&np->timer); > + NCR_UNLOCK_NCB(np, flags);
I'm only reading the diff, but this change looks wrong. The simplest solution is del_timer_sync() instead of LOCK;del_timer;UNLOCK.
Why do you acqurie the NCB spinlock? the _timeout function runs without it.
-- Manfred - 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/
| |