Messages in this thread | ![/](/images/icornerl.gif) | | Date | Fri, 01 Apr 2005 17:52:07 +0400 | From | Oleg Nesterov <> | Subject | Re: [RFC][PATCH] timers fixes/improvements |
| |
Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Oleg Nesterov <oleg@tv-sign.ru> wrote: > > > struct timer_list { > > ... > > timer_base_t *_base; > > }; > > namespace cleanliness: i'd suggest s/_base/base.
I deliberately renamed it to '_base' because then it is much more grepable. But I don't mind doing s/_base/base/ if you prefer.
> > int __mod_timer(struct timer_list *timer, unsigned long expires) > [...] > > /* Ensure the timer is serialized. */ > > if (base != &new_base->t_base > > && base->running_timer == timer) > > goto unlock; > > > unlock: > > spin_unlock_irqrestore(&base->lock, flags); > > } while (ret < 0); > > so we keep looping in __mod_timer() when the timer is running? Couldnt > this be a performance hit?
I hope it is unlikely that __mod_timer() would hit the already running timer, so hopefully this will not degrade the performance. And I don't see a simple alternative to ensure the timer's serialization. At least it spins without interrupts disabling.
Oleg. - 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) |