[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.1.10.0808130956360.3462@nehalem.linux-foundation.org>
Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2008 09:57:33 -0700 (PDT)
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Huang Ying <ying.huang@...el.com>
cc: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>, nigel@...el.suspend2.net,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@...hat.com>, mingo@...e.hu,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Kexec Mailing List <kexec@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] kexec jump: fix compiling warning on xchg(&kexec_lock,
0) in kernel_kexec()
On Wed, 13 Aug 2008, Huang Ying wrote:
>
> - xchg(&kexec_lock, 0);
> + locked = xchg(&kexec_lock, 0);
> + BUG_ON(!locked);
Why do you want to do this at all?
And why do you implement your locks with xchg() in the first place? That's
total and utter crap.
Hint: we have _real_ locking primitives in the kernel.
Linus
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists