Re: flush_scheduled_tasks() question

2001-01-29 Thread Manfred Spraul
David Woodhouse wrote: > > -static struct tq_struct dummy_task; > +static struct tq_struct dummy_task /* = all zero */; > That comment is superflous - that's just C. The non-obvious part is +static struct tq_struct dummy_task; /* remains zero, run_task_queue() supports tqs.routine==NULL*/ BUT:

Re: flush_scheduled_tasks() question

2001-01-29 Thread David Woodhouse
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said: > Is is intentional that tummy_task is not initialized? It _is_ initialised. To zero :) > Ok, it won't crash because the current __run_task_queue() > implementation doesn't call tq->routine if it's NULL, but IMHO it's > ugly. -static struct tq_struct dummy_task; +stati

flush_scheduled_tasks() question

2001-01-28 Thread Manfred Spraul
Is is intentional that tummy_task is not initialized? Ok, it won't crash because the current __run_task_queue() implementation doesn't call tq->routine if it's NULL, but IMHO it's ugly. Additionally I don't like the loop in flush_scheduled_tasks(), what about replacing it with a locked semaphore