On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 04:20:27PM +0200, Lars-Peter Clausen wrote: > On 05/23/2013 04:05 PM, Mark Brown wrote:
> > This seems really invasive, why not just have the lock that gets passed > > in point to a struct which has both the lock and the flags? As far as > > the core is concerned the lock is just whatever data is required to do > > the locking, the fact that it's actually two values is an implementation > > detail of this locking implementation. > I think that won't work. spin_lock_irqsave() will write to the flags > parameter before it has successfully taken the look. So if a process running > on another CPU tries to acquire the the lock while it is already held we'll > end up overwriting the flags. E.g: So you'd have to allocate a struct on the stack with a pointer and the flags in it and initialise the pointer. Not awesome but not the end of the world.
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
