lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Apr]   [22]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 1/2] klist: implement KLIST_INIT() and DEFINE_KLIST()
Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, 2008-04-22 at 18:57 +0900, Tejun Heo wrote:
>> klist is missing static initializers and definition helper. Add them.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Tejun Heo <htejun@gmail.com>
>> ---
>> I can't tell who's in charge of this code, so I'm including last two
>> people who made changes and Andrew :-) This will be used by later USB
>> mode switch support, so I'm cc'ing USB people too.
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>> include/linux/klist.h | 8 ++++++++
>> 1 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/include/linux/klist.h b/include/linux/klist.h
>> index 7407125..c6b697c 100644
>> --- a/include/linux/klist.h
>> +++ b/include/linux/klist.h
>> @@ -25,6 +25,14 @@ struct klist {
>> void (*put)(struct klist_node *);
>> };
>>
>> +#define KLIST_INIT(_name, _get, _put) \
>> + { .k_lock = __SPIN_LOCK_UNLOCKED(klist.k_lock), \
>
> May I ask you make that: __SPIN_LOCK_UNLOCKED(_name.k_lock)
>
> Otherwise we'll end up with multiple classes that have the same name.

These locks don't nest so being in the same class should be okay and I
was following what (at least some of) other __SPIN_LOCK_UNLOCKED users
are doing. If putting these locks into separate classes is the RTTD, sure.

Thanks.

--
tejun


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2008-04-22 15:07    [W:0.060 / U:0.080 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site