On Thu, 2010-10-14 at 18:08 +0530, Balbir Singh wrote:
quoted text
> > > 
> > > hrtimer_start_expires(period_timer, HRTIMER_MODE_ABS_PINNED) if we
> > > don't care about wakeup_softirq, is there a reason we prefer to keep
> > > wakeup as 0?
> > 
> > You cannot do wakeups while holding the rq->lock, can you? :-)
> >
> 
> :-) Yes, given that we wakeup softirq only for the current CPU. There
> is scope for some code reuse anyway, I'll see if I can send a patch. 

Well, both Thomas and I would like hrtimer_start() and friends to return
-ETIME in this case. But that means changing all callers to cope with
that, and sweeping the tree to make that happen is like lots of work.
--
unsubscribe notice
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/