lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Jan]   [9]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectDoes CONFIG_PARAVIRT imply usage of byte locks?
Hi,

in [1] Linus states that CONFIG_PARAVIRT implies usage of inferior locks.

Looking at the code, I wonder whether are we in fact really using byte
locks in CONFIG_PARAVIRT situation? Where are we actually setting
pv_lock_ops.spin_lock pointer to point to __byte_spin_lock?

Such initialization seems to happen only in paravirt_use_bytelocks()
function, but my blind eyes prevent me from finding a callsite from which
this function would eventually get called.

It seems to me that paravirt_use_bytelocks() is a dead code that gets
never called, and the same applies to the implementations of write locks.
What did I miss?

[1] http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=123144211719754&w=2

Thanks,

--
Jiri Kosina
SUSE Labs


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2009-01-09 23:01    [W:0.502 / U:1.328 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site