lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2003]   [Jan]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: spin_locks without smp.
From
Date
On Fri, 2003-01-10 at 11:45, William Lee Irwin III wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 10, 2003 at 12:42:34PM +0100, Maciej Soltysiak wrote:
> > while browsing through the network drivers about the etherleak issue i
> > found that some drivers have:
> > #ifdef CONFIG_SMP
> > spin_lock_irqsave(...)
> > #endif
> > and some just:
> > spin_lock_irqsave(...)
> > or similar.
> > Which version should be practiced? i thought spinlocks are irrelevant
> > without SMP so we should use #ifdef to shorten the execution path.
>
> Buggy on preempt. Remove the #ifdef

And render the driver unusable. Very clever. How about understanding *why*
something was done first 8)

-
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 13:32    [W:0.047 / U:0.080 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site