Jarek Poplawski wrote, On 11/04/2007 06:58 PM:
> Eric Dumazet wrote, On 11/04/2007 12:31 PM:
...
>> +static inline int inet_ehash_locks_alloc(struct inet_hashinfo *hashinfo)
>> +{
...
>> + if (sizeof(rwlock_t) != 0) {
...
>> + for (i = 0; i < size; i++)
>> + rwlock_init(&hashinfo->ehash_locks[i]);
>
>
> This looks better now, but still is doubtful to me: even if it's safe with
> current rwlock implementation, can't we imagine some new debugging or
> statistical code added, which would be called from rwlock_init() without
> using rwlock_t structure? IMHO, if read_lock() etc. are called in such a
> case, rwlock_init() should be done as well.
Of course I mean: if sizeof(rwlock_t) == 0.
Jarek P
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
