lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2011]   [Aug]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] x86, efi: Don't recursively acquire rtc_lock
>>> Matt Fleming  08/04/11 11:33 AM >>>
>On Thu, 2011-08-04 at 03:53 +0100, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>
>> Seems the wrong approach to me: The call happening with the lock held
>> is the wrong part imo, and hence the fix ought to be to drop the lock
>> there.
>
>But what about other platforms that provide a get_wallclock()
>implementation such as the kvm or xen code? If we called get_wallclock()

Virtual platforms will have to take care of the serialization in the
host anyway, so the guest side implementation of getwallclock et al
is entirely unaffected.

>without rtc_lock held we'd be requiring everyone to lock it in their
>clock code, which is unnecessary work and increases the amount of code
>that touches rtc_lock (not to mention spreading it across several
>files).
>
>I think it's much better to do the locking as high up the callstack as
>possible and preferably in as few places as possible.

I agree to the "as few places as possible" part.

Jan



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2011-08-05 19:07    [W:0.058 / U:0.068 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site