Re: [PATCH] RT: epca_lock to DEFINE_SPINLOCK

On Thu, 29 Sep 2005, Nikita Danilov wrote:

>
> The only reasonable case where DEFINE_FOO(x) is really necessary is when
> initializer uses address of x, but even in that case something like
>
>         spinlock_t guard = SPINLOCK_UNLOCKED(guard);
>
> is much more readable than
>
>         DEFINE_SPIN_LOCK(guard);
>

Except that the former is also error prone. I just found a bug in my code
(I customize Ingo's RT kernel) where I had a cut and paste error:

spinlock_t a = SPINLOCK_UNLOCKED(a);
spinlock_t b = SPINLOCK_UNLOCKED(a);

This took me two days to find since the problems occurred elsewhere.

-- Steve

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

---

• References:
  • [PATCH] RT: epca_lock to DEFINE_SPINLOCK
    • From: Daniel Walker <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH] RT: epca_lock to DEFINE_SPINLOCK
    • From: Arjan van de Ven <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH] RT: epca_lock to DEFINE_SPINLOCK
    • From: Roland Dreier <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH] RT: epca_lock to DEFINE_SPINLOCK
    • From: Nikita Danilov <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH] remove check_region in drivers-char-specialix.c
• Next by Date: Re: [patch] Reset the high water marks in CPUs pcp list
• Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH] RT: epca_lock to DEFINE_SPINLOCK
• Next by thread: [PATCH] RT: Add __HAVE_ARCH_DIV_LL_X_L_REM
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]