On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 08:59:28AM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Wed, 16 Oct 2013 13:53:56 +0200
> Frederic Weisbecker <fweis...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> > static int done;
> >
> > if (!done) {
> > trace_printk(something);
> > trace_printk(something else);
> > trace_dump_stack();
> > done = 1;
> > }
> >
> > Having a DO_ONCE() would help a lot I think.
> >
> > Now we can rename it to __DO_ONCE() and put a big fat comment to avoid it
> > to be misused.
>
> I wonder if we should make it just ONCE(), with no arguments that
> should go into an if statement.
>
>
> if (ONCE())
> do_this_function_once();
Or TRUE_ONCE() may be?
But what don't you like in DO_ONCE()? Its upside is that it consolidate the
whole
call.
Also there is still the COND() part to handle. Note that COND things
need to return the condition as well.
Thanks.
>
>
> Where ONCE() is:
>
> ({
> static int __once;
> int __old_once = __once;
>
> __once = 1;
> __old_once;
> })
>
> Or the xchg version:
>
> ({
> static int __once;
>
> if (!__once)
> xchg(&__once, 1);
> else
> 1;
> })
>
> -- 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/
