mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* spin_unlock_bh() and preempt_check_resched()
@ 2005-05-20 15:18 Samuel Thibault
  2005-05-21 15:50 ` [PATCH] " Samuel Thibault
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 2+ messages in thread
From: Samuel Thibault @ 2005-05-20 15:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: linux-kernel

Hi,

I'm wondering about macros like _spin_unlock_bh(lock):
do { \
        _raw_spin_unlock(lock); \
        preempt_enable(); \
        local_bh_enable(); \
        __release(lock); \
} while (0)

Is there a reason for using preempt_enable() instead of a simple
preempt_enable_no_resched() ?

Since we know bottom halves are disabled, preempt_schedule() will always
return at once (preempt_count!=0), and hence preempt_check_resched() is
useless here...

Regards,
Samuel

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2005-05-21 15:50 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 2+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2005-05-20 15:18 spin_unlock_bh() and preempt_check_resched() Samuel Thibault
2005-05-21 15:50 ` [PATCH] " Samuel Thibault

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox

Powered by JetHome