[lkml]   [2003]   [Sep]   [15]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [PATCH] kernel/futex.c: Uneeded memory barrier
    In message <> you write:
    > Rusty Russell wrote:
    > > I personally *HATE* the set_task_state()/__set_task_state() macros.
    > > Simple assignments shouldn't be hidden behind macros, unless there's
    > > something really subtle involved.
    > There _is_ something subtle involved. Back in ye olde days, folk

    This is what I hate about EMail. You had two choices here: either I
    don't understand you, or you don't understand me. You chose wrong,
    and wasted a lot of time on an (excellent, BTW) explanation.

    I wasn't clear: __set_task_state() and __set_current_state() should
    not exist, they are assignments. set_task_state() should not exist,
    since it's only used for current anyway. set_current_state should be
    split into set_current_interruptible() and
    set_current_uninterruptible(), except...

    > Sprinkling special kinds of memory barrier into all the drivers is not
    > the kind of thing driver writers get right. Also if you look at the

    ....hiding the subtlety in wrapper functions is the wrong approach. We
    have excellent wait_event, wait_event_interruptible and
    wait_event_interruptible_timeout macros in wait.h which these drivers
    should be using, which would make them simpler, less buggy and

    Hope that clarifies?
    Anyone who quotes me in their sig is an idiot. -- Rusty Russell.
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:48    [W:0.019 / U:4.184 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site