lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2013]   [Jun]   [20]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH] kernel/timer.c: using spin_lock_irqsave instead of spin_lock + local_irq_save, especially when CONFIG_LOCKDEP not defined
From
Date
On Thu, 2013-06-20 at 16:37 +0800, Chen Gang wrote:

> spin_lock_irqsave(&lock, flags);
>
> is not semantically the same as
>
> local_irq_save(flags);
> spin_lock(&lock);
>
> It depend on the spin_lock_irqsave() implementation, if the parameters
> has no relation ship with each other, semantically the same.

Of course all implementations must respect the blocks are
totally the same.

Arguing about this is plain silly.

If you found a buggy implementation, please fix it.




\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2013-06-20 12:01    [W:0.086 / U:0.048 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site