[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.02.1205291137580.3231@ionos>
Date: Tue, 29 May 2012 11:38:27 +0200 (CEST)
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To: Nikunj A Dadhania <nikunj@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Gilad Ben-Yossef <gilad@...yossef.com>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [patch 2/4] timers: Consolidate base->next_timer update
On Tue, 29 May 2012, Nikunj A Dadhania wrote:
> >
> > -static void internal_add_timer(struct tvec_base *base, struct timer_list *timer)
> > +static void
> > +__internal_add_timer(struct tvec_base *base, struct timer_list *timer)
> > {
> > unsigned long expires = timer->expires;
> > unsigned long idx = expires - base->timer_jiffies;
> > @@ -372,6 +373,17 @@ static void internal_add_timer(struct tv
> > list_add_tail(&timer->entry, vec);
> > }
> >
> > +static void internal_add_timer(struct tvec_base *base, struct timer_list *timer)
> > +{
> > + __internal_add_timer(base, timer);
> > + /*
> > + * Update base->next_timer if this is the earliest one.
> > + */
> > + if (time_before(timer->expires, base->next_timer) &&
> > + !tbase_get_deferrable(timer->base))
> > + base->next_timer = timer->expires;
> > +}
> > +
> >
> Shouldn't this be like this?
>
> + /*
> + * Update base->next_timer if this is the earliest one.
> + */
> + if (time_before(timer->expires, base->next_timer) &&
> + !tbase_get_deferrable(timer->base))
> + base->next_timer = timer->expires;
> + __internal_add_timer(base, timer);
>
> As per the below code?
And why should this matter?
--
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