Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 25 Apr 2008 09:37:36 -0700 | From | Greg KH <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 1/2] klist: implement KLIST_INIT() and DEFINE_KLIST() |
| |
On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 10:10:11PM +0900, Tejun Heo wrote: > Peter Zijlstra wrote: >>> 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. >> Ah, they'll actually be in seprate classes all of the same name. So I >> think it is cleaner to cause them to have separate names too. >> see look_up_lock_class() in kernel/lockdep.c: >> /* >> * Static locks do not have their class-keys yet - for them the >> key >> * is the lock object itself: >> */ >> if (unlikely(!lock->key)) >> lock->key = (void *)lock; > > Ah.. I'll put change it to name. Thanks.
Do you have a new revision of this patch series that I can apply to my trees?
thanks,
greg k-h
| |