Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: spin_locks without smp. | From | Alan Cox <> | Date | 10 Jan 2003 13:23:56 +0000 |
| |
On Fri, 2003-01-10 at 11:45, William Lee Irwin III wrote: > On Fri, Jan 10, 2003 at 12:42:34PM +0100, Maciej Soltysiak wrote: > > while browsing through the network drivers about the etherleak issue i > > found that some drivers have: > > #ifdef CONFIG_SMP > > spin_lock_irqsave(...) > > #endif > > and some just: > > spin_lock_irqsave(...) > > or similar. > > Which version should be practiced? i thought spinlocks are irrelevant > > without SMP so we should use #ifdef to shorten the execution path. > > Buggy on preempt. Remove the #ifdef
And render the driver unusable. Very clever. How about understanding *why* something was done first 8)
- 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/
| |