lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2011]   [Jul]   [4]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH 1/4] perf, x86: Add Intel Nehalem/Westmere uncore pmu
From
Date
On Mon, 2011-07-04 at 14:39 +0800, Lin Ming wrote:
> > Does this really need to be a raw spinlock?
>
> I think spinlock is enough.

No, raw_spinlock_t was correct.

Talking of which:

+ struct spinlock lock;

That too should be a raw_spinlock_t.


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2011-07-04 10:41    [W:0.084 / U:0.216 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site