lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2014]   [Jun]   [4]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [patch v2 2/5] rtmutex: Cleanup deadlock detector debug logic
On Wed, 4 Jun 2014, Steven Rostedt wrote:

> On Wed, 4 Jun 2014 15:17:35 +0200 (CEST)
> Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> wrote:
>
>
> > > > +static int rt_mutex_cond_detect_deadlock(struct rt_mutex_waiter *waiter,
> > > > + enum rtmutex_chainwalk detect)
> > > > +{
> > > > + return debug_rt_mutex_detect_deadlock(waiter, detect);
> > > > +}
> > > > +
> > > > +/*
> > >
> > > I'm curious to why you created this wrapper function that adds no
> > > value? Why not call debug_rt_mutex_detect_deadlock() directly?
> >
> > debug_rt_mutex_detect_deadlock() smells like a magic debug feature,
> > while rt_mutex_cond_detect_deadlock() clearly says; It's
> > conditional.
>
> Which brings up the next obvious question. Um, why not just rename
> debug_rt_mutex_detect_deadlock() to rt_mutex_cond_detect_deadlock()?

Because I wanted to keep the cond function in the main source file
along with the comments instead of having two of the same in the
headers.

Thanks,

tglx


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2014-06-04 22:41    [W:0.062 / U:0.092 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site