On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 10:07:56PM -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> > diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/smp.c b/arch/x86/kernel/smp.c
> > index 20da354..4e44840 100644
> > --- a/arch/x86/kernel/smp.c
> > +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/smp.c
> > @@ -118,9 +118,11 @@ static bool smp_no_nmi_ipi = false;
> > void ticket_spin_lock_wait(arch_spinlock_t *lock, struct __raw_tickets inc)
> > {
> > for (;;) {
> > - cpu_relax();
> > - inc.head = ACCESS_ONCE(lock->tickets.head);
> > + int loops = 50 * (__ticket_t)(inc.tail - inc.head);
> > + while (loops--)
> > + cpu_relax();
>
> -ENOCOMMENT
>
> Please add a comment above to explain what it's doing. Don't expect
> people to check change logs. Also, explain why you picked 50.
>
OK, I replied here before reading patch 3 (still reviewing it). Why have
this patch at all? Just to test if you broke something between this and
patch 3? Or perhaps patch 3 may not get accepted? In that case, you
would still need a comment.
Either explicitly state that this patch is just a stepping stone for
patch 3, and will either be accepted or rejected along with patch 3. Or
keep it as a stand alone patch and add comments as such. Or just get rid
of it all together.
Thanks,
-- Steve
--
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/
