On Tue, 25 Jun 2013, Ming Lei wrote:
> >> +
> >> + spin_lock(&bh->lock);
> >> + list_add_tail(&urb->urb_list, &bh->head);
> >> + if (bh->running)
> >> + sched = 0;
> >> + else
> >> + sched = 1;
> >> + spin_unlock(&bh->lock);
> >
> > How about calling this variable "running" instead of "sched"? Then you
> > could just say:
> >
> > running = bh->running;
> >
> > with no "if" statement.
>
> OK, even we can do this below without name change:
>
> sched = !bh->running;
>
> >
> >> +
> >> + if (!sched)
> >> + ;
> >> + else if (high_prio_bh)
> >> + tasklet_hi_schedule(&bh->bh);
> >> + else
> >> + tasklet_schedule(&bh->bh);
The advantage of "running" instead of "sched" is that it avoids a
double negative:
sched = !bh->running;
...
if (!sched) ...
as opposed to
running = bh->running;
...
if (running) ...
Alan Stern
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
