[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <51C1861A.6030901@asianux.com>
Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2013 18:21:14 +0800
From: Chen Gang <gang.chen@...anux.com>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
CC: "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] kernel/timer.c: using spin_lock_irqsave instead of spin_lock
+ local_irq_save, especially when CONFIG_LOCKDEP not defined
On 06/19/2013 05:59 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> I'm well aware how that works. And there is no difference whether you
> do:
>
> local_irq_save(flags);
> spin_lock(&lock);
> or
> spin_lock_irqsave(&lock, flags);
if CONFIG_LOCKDEP is not defined, they are not semantically the same.
Thanks.
--
Chen Gang
Asianux Corporation
--
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