Re: [PATCH] kernel/timer.c: using spin_lock_irqsave instead ofspin_lock + local_irq_save, especially when CONFIG_LOCKDEP not defined
From: Eric Dumazet
Date: Thu Jun 20 2013 - 05:13:07 EST
On Thu, 2013-06-20 at 16:37 +0800, Chen Gang wrote:
> spin_lock_irqsave(&lock, flags);
>
> is not semantically the same as
>
> local_irq_save(flags);
> spin_lock(&lock);
>
> It depend on the spin_lock_irqsave() implementation, if the parameters
> has no relation ship with each other, semantically the same.
Of course all implementations must respect the blocks are
totally the same.
Arguing about this is plain silly.
If you found a buggy implementation, please fix it.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/