lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2005]   [Mar]   [16]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [more markup]  [less markup]  [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
DateWed, 16 Mar 2005 10:00:24 +0100
FromIngo Molnar <>
SubjectRe: [PATCH 2/2] del_timer_sync: proof of concept
* Oleg Nesterov <oleg@tv-sign.ru> wrote:

> New rules:
> 	->_base &  1	: is timer pending
> 	->_base & ~1	: timer's base

how would it look like if we had a separate timer->pending field after
all? Would it be faster/cleaner?

(we dont need to keep them small _that_ bad - if there's a good reason
we should rather add a clean new field than to encode two fields into
one field and complicate the code.)

	Ingo
-
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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 14:11    [from the cache]
©2003-2008