>> Is there some reason you don't use the simpler singly-linked list
>> construction with the tail being a pointer to a pointer:
> Sure, that would also work.
It's just a convenient simplification, already used in struct hlist_node.
>> +/*
>> + * Queue a task for later wake-up by wake_up_q(). I
On Mon, 2015-04-20 at 14:24 -0400, George Spelvin wrote:
> +struct wake_q_head {
> + struct wake_q_node *first;
> + struct wake_q_node *last;
> +};
> +
> +#define WAKE_Q_TAIL ((struct wake_q_node *) 0x01)
> +
> +#define WAKE_Q(name) \
> + struct wake_q_he
+struct wake_q_head {
+ struct wake_q_node *first;
+ struct wake_q_node *last;
+};
+
+#define WAKE_Q_TAIL ((struct wake_q_node *) 0x01)
+
+#define WAKE_Q(name) \
+ struct wake_q_head name = { WAKE_Q_TAIL, WAKE_Q_TAIL }
Is there some reason you do
On Sun, Apr 19, 2015 at 12:17:39PM -0700, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
> +void wake_q_add(struct wake_q_head *head, struct task_struct *task)
> +{
> + struct wake_q_node *node = &task->wake_q;
> +
> + /*
> + * Atomically grab the task, if ->wake_q is !nil already it means
> + * its alre
4 matches
Mail list logo
