On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 07:02:56PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Sun, 2013-06-09 at 12:36 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
>
> > +/*
> > + * Return a pointer to the queue header associated with the specified lock,
> > + * or return NULL if there is no queue for the lock or if the lock's queue
> > + * is in transition.
> > + */
> > +static struct tkt_q_head *tkt_q_find_head(arch_spinlock_t *asp)
>
> BTW, what does "asp" mean? arch_spinlock?
"arch_spinlock pointer", but yes. Or I suppose a millenia-late warning
to Cleopatra.
> If so, can we just call it
> "lock" and be consistent with all the other spinlock calls in the
> kernel. Because, I keep thinking this has something to do with Microsoft
> dynamic web pages.
Fair enough!
Thanx, Paul
> -- Steve
>
> > +{
> > + int i;
> > + int start;
> > +
> > + start = i = tkt_q_hash(asp);
> > + do
> > + if (tkt_q_heads[i].ref == asp)
> > + return &tkt_q_heads[i];
> > + while ((i = tkt_q_next_slot(i)) != start);
> > + return NULL;
> > +}
> > +
>
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
