[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1328653791.18150.5.camel@js-netbook>
Date: Tue, 07 Feb 2012 14:29:51 -0800
From: John Stultz <john.stultz@...aro.org>
To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
Cc: Linux PM list <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Magnus Damm <magnus.damm@...il.com>, markgross@...gnar.org,
Matthew Garrett <mjg@...hat.com>,
Greg KH <greg@...uxfoundation.org>,
Arve Hjønnevåg <arve@...roid.com>,
Brian Swetland <swetland@...gle.com>,
Neil Brown <neilb@...e.de>,
Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/8] PM / Sleep: Initialize wakeup source locks in
wakeup_source_add()
On Tue, 2012-02-07 at 02:01 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> From: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@...k.pl>
>
> Initialize wakeup source locks in wakeup_source_add() instead of
> wakeup_source_create(), because otherwise the locks of the wakeup
> sources that haven't been allocated with wakeup_source_create()
> aren't initialized and handled properly.
>
> Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@...k.pl>
Ah, I've shot myself in the foot before, forgetting to init the wakeup
source, so this should be good. Although, would a WARN_ON be better then
just initializing the lock in add? That way bad behavior is more likely
to be corrected, rather then just ignored.
thanks
-john
--
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