On Wed, 30 Jun 2004 09:30:12 -0300, Felipe W Damasio wrote: > > > Anupam Kapoor wrote: > > > hmm, i am not sure about this but does it make sense to use > > __set_current_state for functions that have fastcall ? and use > > set_current_state for others ? > > It's not _that_ simple. We need set_current_state to racing if > instructions are reordered. can you please elaborate what you mean here, i don't understand the connotations sorry ! > > __set_current_state should *always* be used when setting to TASK_RUNNING. > > But since function calls act also as memory barriers and most of the > locking primitives also have memory barriers built into them, there are > few places where we actually need set_current_state (rather than > __set_current_state). ah ok ! thanks for the explanation. i will check out lkml for more info. kind regards anupam > > Please check the LKML archives for further explanations. > > But in short: No, it's not just a blind search-and-replace kind of thing. > > Cheers, > > Felipe > -- > It's most certainly GNU/Linux, not Linux. Read more at > http://www.gnu.org/gnu/why-gnu-linux.html >