Messages in this thread | ![/](/images/icornerl.gif) | | Date | Wed, 22 Jan 2003 17:31:01 -0800 (PST) | From | "Randy.Dunlap" <> | Subject | alternate high-res-timers patch comments (II) |
| |
Hi,
Here are more comments/questions on Jim's alternate high-res-timers patch. Some of this is just to understand the code.
a. Why return here and skip profiling? Is this an intermediate (high-res) timer interrupt that shouldn't be used for profiling?
inline void smp_local_timer_interrupt(struct pt_regs * regs) { int cpu = smp_processor_id(); + + if (!run_posix_timers((void *)regs)) + return;
x86_do_profile(regs);
b. In kernel/id2ptr.c,
<id_free_cnt>: change cnt to count; just a style thing. Linux doesn't use many abbreviations, which makes it easier on everyone not having to remember "what is the abbreviation that code uses for <whatever>?".
sub_alloc() is recursive. How bounded is it? 32 calls max? I'm not totally against recursion, but it needs to be *well-bounded*.
Same for sub_remove().
-- ~Randy
- 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/
| ![\](/images/icornerr.gif) |