* Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com> wrote:

quoted text
>  /* doms_cur_mutex serializes access to doms_cur[] array */
>  static DEFINE_MUTEX(doms_cur_mutex);
>  
> +static inline void lock_doms_cur(void)
> +{
> +	mutex_lock(&doms_cur_mutex);
> +}

quoted text
> @@ -7813,8 +7811,10 @@ int arch_reinit_sched_domains(void)
>  	int err;
>  
>  	get_online_cpus();
> +	lock_doms_cur();

thanks, that looks a lot more clean already. May i ask for another 
thing, if you are hacking on this anyway? Please get rid of the 
lock_doms_cur() complication now that it's not conditional - an open 
coded mutex_lock(&sched_doms_mutex) looks more readable - it gives a 
clear idea about what's happening. Also, please rename sched_doms_mutex 
to something less tongue-twisting - such as sched_domains_mutex. Hm?

	Ingo
--
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/