Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 2 Mar 2007 11:45:24 -0800 | From | Andrew Morton <> | Subject | Re: [patch] timer/hrtimer: take per cpu locks in sane order |
| |
On Fri, 2 Mar 2007 20:08:36 +0100 Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com> wrote:
> +/* > + * double_hrtimer_lock/unlock are used to ensure that on cpu hotplug the > + * per cpu timer locks are always taken in the same order. > + */ > +static void double_hrtimer_lock(struct hrtimer_cpu_base *base1, > + struct hrtimer_cpu_base *base2, int ind) > + __acquires(base1->lock) > + __acquires(base2->lock) > +{ > > ... > > +/* > + * double_timer_lock/unlock are used to ensure that on cpu hotplug the > + * per cpu timer locks are always taken in the same order. > + */ > +static void __devinit double_timer_lock(tvec_base_t *base1, > + tvec_base_t *base2, int ind) > + __acquires(base1->lock) > + __acquires(base2->lock)
hm. Can we not just pass in the spinlock_t*'s and use a common function?
void double_spin_lock(spinlock_t *l1, spinlock_t *l2, int ind);
that way it has nothing to do with timers and can potentially be used elsewhere in the kernel, too.
(what does "ind" mean?) - 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/
| |