[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20090108171048.5e138f8d.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2009 17:10:48 -0800
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mingo@...e.hu, pq@....fi,
srostedt@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] mmiotrace: count events lost due to not recording
On Thu, 08 Jan 2009 19:27:50 -0500
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org> wrote:
> +static atomic_t dropped_count;
Formally, this should be
static atomic_t dropped_count = ATOMIC_INIT(0);
but no atomic_t implementations need that, and I'm sure that if one
turns up wchih _does_ need it (say, it has a spinlock inside its
atomic_t) then the kernel would break all over the place.
So perhaps we should formally state that the all-zeroes pattern is an
acceptable way of initialising an atomic_t.
In which case these:
y:/usr/src/linux-2.6.28> grep -r "atomic_t.*=.*ATOMIC_INIT" . | wc -l
110
become cleanup fodder.
--
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