Messages in this thread Patch in this message | | | Date | Fri, 20 Jul 2007 08:50:29 -0400 | From | "Dmitry Torokhov" <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH for review] [12/48] x86_64: use the global PIT lock |
| |
On 7/20/07, Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de> wrote: > > > +static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(i8253_lock); > > + > > static __init int add_pcspkr(void) > > { > > struct platform_device *pd; > > @@ -1501,9 +1503,14 @@ static __init int add_pcspkr(void) > > if (!pd) > > return -ENOMEM; > > > > +pd->dev.platform_data = &i8253_lock; > > That seems pretty ugly to pass spinlocks around in void * pointers.
That spinlock _is_ platform data. We could define
struct pcspkr_platform_data { spinlock_t *lock; };
and pass around this as the rest of platform code does but then we'd need a header file and it would add a level of indirection but if you like this better I can change it. Otherwise spinlock is another data structure and we pass them around all teh time.
> Also > out of general memory bloat reasons i don't like allocating big data structures > just for this. >
I am not sure where you see new data structure allocation... If you look at your box you should see that /sys/bus/platform/devices/pcspkr device is already there. We already create it so that pcspkr driver can bind to it.
> Wouldn't it be better to just define i8253_lock weakly in the pcspkr code and let > the architecture override it?
Yes, it probably is btetter.
> > > Index: work/arch/x86_64/kernel/time.c > > =================================================================== > > --- work.orig/arch/x86_64/kernel/time.c > > +++ work/arch/x86_64/kernel/time.c > > @@ -23,6 +23,7 @@ > > #include <linux/module.h> > > #include <linux/device.h> > > #include <linux/sysdev.h> > > +#include <linux/platform_device.h> > > #include <linux/bcd.h> > > #include <linux/notifier.h> > > #include <linux/cpu.h> > > @@ -185,7 +186,7 @@ void main_timer_handler(void) > > set_rtc_mmss(xtime.tv_sec); > > rtc_update = xtime.tv_sec + 660; > > } > > - > > + > > write_sequnlock(&xtime_lock); > > } > > No random white space changes in patches, multiple occurrences ?!? >
By bad, sorry.
-- Dmitry - 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/
| |