[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CANDhNCrU+WufRrOreDNG4jAJMhxXphqyWLm_hGr_ihN2TDKdRQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2024 14:19:17 -0700
From: John Stultz <jstultz@...gle.com>
To: Anna-Maria Behnsen <anna-maria@...utronix.de>
Cc: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
Miroslav Lichvar <mlichvar@...hat.com>, Richard Cochran <richardcochran@...il.com>,
Christopher S Hall <christopher.s.hall@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 08/25] timekeeping: Encapsulate locking/unlocking of timekeeper_lock
On Wed, Oct 9, 2024 at 1:29 AM Anna-Maria Behnsen
<anna-maria@...utronix.de> wrote:
>
> From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
>
> From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
>
> timekeeper_lock protects updates of timekeeper (tk_core). It is also used
> by vdso_update_begin/end() and not only internally by the timekeeper code.
>
> As long as there is only a single timekeeper, this works fine. But when
> the timekeeper infrastructure will be reused for per ptp clock timekeepers,
> timekeeper_lock needs to be part of tk_core..
>
> Therefore encapuslate locking/unlocking of timekeeper_lock and make the
> lock static.
>
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
> Signed-off-by: Anna-Maria Behnsen <anna-maria@...utronix.de>
Acked-by: John Stultz <jstultz@...gle.com>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists