Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 20 Jan 2011 11:37:19 -0800 | Subject | Re: [PATCH] RFC: abstract access to xtime_lock into a set of inline functions | From | john stultz <> |
| |
On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 9:30 AM, Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org> wrote: > On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 06:14:08PM +0100, Torben Hohn wrote: >> the -rt patches change the xtime_lock to a raw_seqlock_t >> so a pretty huge portion of the patch deals with changing >> the locking functions. >> >> this commit uses inline functions, to hide the type >> of the lock. > > That's not how kernel code usually works.
Yea, I'm not a fan of this patch either.
>> - write_seqlock(&xtime_lock); >> + xtime_write_seqlock(); >> do_timer(1); >> - write_sequnlock(&xtime_lock); >> + xtime_write_sequnlock(); > > However there's a pretty clear pattern of taking xtime_lock, calling > do_timer and then releasing. A useful thing you could do is to rename > do_timer to do_timer_locked and make do_timer take and release > xtime_lock in one place.
Seems like a reasonable suggestion. I suspect there's still quite a bit of stuff done under the same lock right around do_timer on a number of arches, but having a locked call would cut down on how widely xtime is used.
thanks -john -- 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/
| |