From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752617Ab1AXMwC (ORCPT ); Mon, 24 Jan 2011 07:52:02 -0500 Received: from mailout-de.gmx.net ([213.165.64.23]:46918 "HELO mailout-de.gmx.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1751861Ab1AXMwB (ORCPT ); Mon, 24 Jan 2011 07:52:01 -0500 X-Authenticated: #911537 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX1/HB0kv2g3He8LBpuqU5C0gAvC8qUcJMDf0cKR2Fk PPLFrK3KfMAIsr Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2011 13:51:52 +0100 From: torbenh To: Thomas Gleixner Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, johnstul@us.ibm.com, hch@infradead.org, yong.zhang0@gmail.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 09/18] frv: switch do_timer() to xtime_update() Message-ID: <20110124125152.GA29377@siel.b> Mail-Followup-To: Thomas Gleixner , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, johnstul@us.ibm.com, hch@infradead.org, yong.zhang0@gmail.com References: <1295651224-29823-1-git-send-email-torbenh@gmx.de> <1295651224-29823-10-git-send-email-torbenh@gmx.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sat, Jan 22, 2011 at 11:01:49AM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > On Sat, 22 Jan 2011, Torben Hohn wrote: > > > this code looks like its protecting __set_LEDS() with this lock also. > > i dont think thats necessary. > > This changelog is horrible. agreed. what i meant was that: if i do something while holding a lock, it seems to be necessary to do it while holding the lock. > > This code does not look like protecting the __set_LEDS() call with the > xtime_lock. The call happens to be inside the xtime_lock held region. > > Now instead of bringing up a weak argument "I dont think ..." you > should provide a proper analysis why it's safe to move that code out. > > It's pretty simple: > > No other call site of __set_LEDS() is protected by xtime_lock, so > xtime_lock does not protect anything related to __set_LEDS(). It's > just inside the xtime_lock region for no good reason at all. > > Please be more careful when writing change logs, so a reviewer can > understand the reasoning behind your change easily. ok. will do. > > Also all arch/* patches are missing a "Cc: arch-maintainer@somewhere.xxx". i was planning to send it out with --cc-cmd=./scripts/get_maintainers.pl once you thought it was ok. is that procedure ok ? or should i add CC: lines to the commitlogs ? > > > { > > @@ -61,10 +61,11 @@ static irqreturn_t timer_interrupt(int irq, void *dummy) > > * CPU. We need to avoid to SMP race with it. NOTE: we don't need > > * the irq version of write_lock because as just said we have irq > > * locally disabled. -arca > > + * > > + * xtime_update takes the writelock. > > Errm. xtime_update write locks xtime_lock. Please be careful with comments. ok > > Thanks, > > tglx -- torben Hohn