alternate high-res-timers patch comments (II)

From: Randy.Dunlap (
Date: Wed Jan 22 2003 - 20:31:01 EST


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;


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().


- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to More majordomo info at Please read the FAQ at

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jan 23 2003 - 22:00:30 EST