On Tue, 6 Dec 2005 11:40:41 -0800
Greg KH <[email protected]> wrote:
| On Tue, Dec 06, 2005 at 09:56:10AM -0200, Luiz Fernando Capitulino wrote:
| > Greg,
| >
| > Don't get scared. :-)
| >
| > As showed by Eduardo Habkost some days ago, the spin lock 'lock' in the
| > struct 'usb_serial_port' is being used by some USB serial drivers to protect
| > the access to the 'write_urb_busy' member of the same struct.
| >
| > The spin lock however, is needless: we can change 'write_urb_busy' type
| > to be atomic_t and remove all the spin lock usage.
|
| But if you do that, you make things slower on non-smp machines, which
| isn't very nice. Why does the spinlock bother you?
The spinlock makes the code less clear, error prone, and we already a
semaphore in the struct usb_serial_port.
The spinlocks _seems_ useless to me.
--
Luiz Fernando N. Capitulino
-
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/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
