* set_current_state(); vs current->state = bla;
@ 2003-01-01 21:05 Marc-Christian Petersen
2003-01-01 21:45 ` Robert Love
0 siblings, 1 reply; 2+ messages in thread
From: Marc-Christian Petersen @ 2003-01-01 21:05 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-kernel
Hi all,
$subject says it all. Is there _any_ reason why not to use set_current_state?
ciao, Marc
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
* Re: set_current_state(); vs current->state = bla;
2003-01-01 21:05 set_current_state(); vs current->state = bla; Marc-Christian Petersen
@ 2003-01-01 21:45 ` Robert Love
0 siblings, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: Robert Love @ 2003-01-01 21:45 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Marc-Christian Petersen; +Cc: linux-kernel
On Wed, 2003-01-01 at 16:05, Marc-Christian Petersen wrote:
> $subject says it all. Is there _any_ reason why not to use set_current_state?
If you do not need the memory barrier... but then you can use
__set_current_state().
So, no, we should not open code this ever.
Robert Love
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2003-01-01 21:35 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2003-01-01 21:05 set_current_state(); vs current->state = bla; Marc-Christian Petersen
2003-01-01 21:45 ` Robert Love
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox