Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH] softlockup: stop spurious softlockup messages due to overflow | From | Eric Dumazet <> | Date | Thu, 18 Mar 2010 21:45:10 +0100 |
| |
Le jeudi 18 mars 2010 à 16:25 +0100, Ingo Molnar a écrit : > * Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com> wrote: > > > > > Using time_after/before: > > > > diff --git a/kernel/softlockup.c b/kernel/softlockup.c > > index 0d4c789..4b493f6 100644 > > --- a/kernel/softlockup.c > > +++ b/kernel/softlockup.c > > @@ -155,11 +155,11 @@ void softlockup_tick(void) > > * Wake up the high-prio watchdog task twice per > > * threshold timespan. > > */ > > - if (now > touch_ts + softlockup_thresh/2) > > + if (time_after(now - softlockup_thresh/2, touch_ts)) > > wake_up_process(per_cpu(softlockup_watchdog, this_cpu)); > > > > /* Warn about unreasonable delays: */ > > - if (now <= (touch_ts + softlockup_thresh)) > > + if (time_before_eq(now - softlockup_thresh, touch_ts)) > > return; > > Ok, that looks like the most readable variant, agreed? >
Sure ! Colin please submit formally your patch :)
Thanks
-- 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/
| |