lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Mar]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH v4] introduce macro spin_event_timeout()
From
On Thu, Mar 12, 2009 at 9:54 AM, Timur Tabi <timur@freescale.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 11, 2009 at 9:45 PM, Grant Likely <grant.likely@secretlab.ca> wrote:
>
>>> The other big advantage of that approach is that drivers that aren't in
>>> an atomic section can use msleep() and allow the kernel to schedule on
>>> that processor.
>>
>> Ack!  I totally agree.
>
> I'm glad everyone agrees.  I still don't know how to solve the
> problem, though.  I came up with this:
>
> #define spin_until_timeout(condition, timeout)          \
>       for (unsigned long __timeout = jiffies + (timeout);     \
>               (!(condition) && time_after(jiffies, __timeout)); )
>
> Now how do I modify this so that the caller knows whether the loop
> terminated because of a timeout or the condition became true?

How about this:

#define spin_until_timeout(condition, timeout, rc) \
for (unsigned long __timeout = jiffies + (timeout); \
(!(rc = (condition)) && time_after(jiffies, __timeout)); )

g.

--
Grant Likely, B.Sc., P.Eng.
Secret Lab Technologies Ltd.
--
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: 2009-03-12 17:05    [W:0.079 / U:0.352 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site