[lkml]   [2009]   [Jun]   [26]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectDeleting timers

    The major difference -- in fact, almost the only difference -- between
    del_timer() and try_to_del_timer_sync() is that try_to_del_timer_sync
    returns a special code (-1) if the timer couldn't be deleted because it
    is currently running, whereas del_timer doesn't check this.

    Furthermore, the "_sync" in the name suggests that
    try_to_del_timer_sync will wait until a running timer has finished,
    which it clearly does not do.

    Despite these facts, the kerneldoc for try_to_del_timer_sync states
    that it must not be called in interrupt context. Why not? Isn't that
    advice simply wrong?

    With this in mind, would there be any objection if I renamed it to
    try_to_del_timer(), removed the comment forbidding it to be used in
    interrupt context, and made it available even on non-SMP builds?

    Alan Stern

    P.S.: The only other difference is that del_timer calls
    timer_stats_timer_clear_start_info. Why doesn't try_to_del_timer_sync
    do the same thing?

     \ /
      Last update: 2009-06-26 21:53    [W:0.020 / U:1.012 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site