[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1268945110.2894.162.camel@edumazet-laptop>
Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2010 21:45:10 +0100
From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc: Colin Ian King <colin.king@...onical.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] softlockup: stop spurious softlockup messages due to
overflow
Le jeudi 18 mars 2010 à 16:25 +0100, Ingo Molnar a écrit :
> * Colin Ian King <colin.king@...onical.com> wrote:
>
> >
> > Using time_after/before:
> >
> > diff --git a/kernel/softlockup.c b/kernel/softlockup.c
> > index 0d4c789..4b493f6 100644
> > --- a/kernel/softlockup.c
> > +++ b/kernel/softlockup.c
> > @@ -155,11 +155,11 @@ void softlockup_tick(void)
> > * Wake up the high-prio watchdog task twice per
> > * threshold timespan.
> > */
> > - if (now > touch_ts + softlockup_thresh/2)
> > + if (time_after(now - softlockup_thresh/2, touch_ts))
> > wake_up_process(per_cpu(softlockup_watchdog, this_cpu));
> >
> > /* Warn about unreasonable delays: */
> > - if (now <= (touch_ts + softlockup_thresh))
> > + if (time_before_eq(now - softlockup_thresh, touch_ts))
> > return;
>
> Ok, that looks like the most readable variant, agreed?
>
Sure ! Colin please submit formally your patch :)
Thanks
--
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