From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
To: Jake Moilanen <moilanen@austin.ibm.com>
Cc: Linux Kernel list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>,
Jan-Benedict Glaw <jbglaw@lug-owl.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH][RFC] Spinlock-timeout
Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2004 10:49:36 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1086968975.1885.11.camel@gaston> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1086962704.3476.53.camel@dyn95394175.austin.ibm.com>
> Here's a revision to the patch that uses a HAVE_ARCH_GET_TB to allow
> archs use their timebases if they have one, and if they don't, it uses
> jiffies. time_after_eq() is used to do the jiffy checking.
>
> I also left all of the arch/*/Kconfig changes in until a debug Kconfig
> is done. I pretty much added in the spinlock timeout on all archs that
> have CONFIG_DEBUG_SPINLOCK. If I missed your arch, I'm sorry.
Nah, that's not how the abstraction should be done. Much simpler in
fact. Just do something like this in the generic code:
#ifndef ARCH_HAS_SPINLOCK_TIMEOUT
#define get_spinlock_timeout() (jiffies + (SPINLOCK_TIMEOUT * HZ))
#define check_spinlock_timeout(timeout) (time_after_eq(jiffies, timeout))
#endif
That's all. Then, any arch who has it's own implementation of these 2
function will #define ARCH_HAS_SPINLOCK_TIMEOUT and implement them the
way it wants. We shouldn't let anything like get_tb() slip into a common
file, it's totally PPC specific. Other archs may have different counters
they can use to impement the same thing. That part should be entirely
self contained in asm-xxx
Ben.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-06-11 15:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-06-05 20:31 [PATCH][RFC] Spinlock-timeout Jake Moilanen
2004-06-05 20:51 ` Jan-Benedict Glaw
2004-06-10 18:44 ` Jake Moilanen
2004-06-10 19:24 ` Jan-Benedict Glaw
2004-06-10 21:00 ` Randy.Dunlap
2004-06-06 10:13 ` Paul Mackerras
2004-06-06 22:23 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2004-06-11 14:05 ` Jake Moilanen
2004-06-11 15:49 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt [this message]
2004-06-11 21:19 ` moilanen
2004-06-11 22:08 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2004-06-14 13:12 ` Jake Moilanen
2004-06-11 21:22 ` moilanen
2004-06-11 22:09 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2004-06-14 13:13 ` Jake Moilanen
2004-06-11 14:08 ` Jake Moilanen
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1086968975.1885.11.camel@gaston \
--to=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=jbglaw@lug-owl.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=moilanen@austin.ibm.com \
--cc=paulus@samba.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox