From: John Levon <levon@movementarian.org>
To: Mikael Pettersson <mikpe@csd.uu.se>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
oprofile-list@lists.sourceforge.net, torvalds@osdl.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] allow drivers to claim the lapic NMI watchdog HW
Date: Tue, 4 May 2004 12:02:01 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20040504110200.GA9880@compsoc.man.ac.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200405040233.i442X1GO025270@harpo.it.uu.se>
On Tue, May 04, 2004 at 04:33:01AM +0200, Mikael Pettersson wrote:
> +/* lapic_nmi_owner:
> + * +1: the lapic NMI hardware is assigned to the lapic NMI watchdog
> + * 0: the lapic NMI hardware is unassigned
If we're going to have a mini state machine, can't we at least use some
defines for each state...
> + lapic_nmi_owner -= 2; /* +1 -> -1, 0 -> -2 */
...and make this into some readable english via a little helper?
> -EXPORT_SYMBOL(disable_lapic_nmi_watchdog);
> -EXPORT_SYMBOL(enable_lapic_nmi_watchdog);
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(reassign_lapic_nmi_watchdog);
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(release_lapic_nmi_watchdog);
I don't like this new naming. Since the patch is really all about
ownership of the local APIC, can't we call it something like
acquire_lapic_nmi()
release_lapic_nmi()
Neither perfctr nor oprofile have anything to do with watchdogs, so
this:
> - disable_lapic_nmi_watchdog();
> + if (reassign_lapic_nmi_watchdog() < 0) {
Looks a little weird now.
regards
john
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-05-04 11:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-05-04 2:33 [PATCH] allow drivers to claim the lapic NMI watchdog HW Mikael Pettersson
2004-05-04 11:02 ` John Levon [this message]
2004-05-04 15:57 ` Mikael Pettersson
2004-05-04 13:49 ` Albert Cahalan
2004-05-05 9:19 ` [PATCH][updated] " Mikael Pettersson
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=20040504110200.GA9880@compsoc.man.ac.uk \
--to=levon@movementarian.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mikpe@csd.uu.se \
--cc=oprofile-list@lists.sourceforge.net \
--cc=torvalds@osdl.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