Re: [PATCH 1/1] MM: slqb, fix per_cpu access

[Jiri Slaby]

On 11/02/2009 02:23 PM, Rusty Russell wrote:
>> --- a/mm/slqb.c
>> +++ b/mm/slqb.c
>> @@ -2770,16 +2770,16 @@ static DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct delayed_work, cache_trim_work);
>>  
>>  static void __cpuinit start_cpu_timer(int cpu)
>>  {
>> -	struct delayed_work *cache_trim_work = &per_cpu(cache_trim_work, cpu);
>> +	struct delayed_work *_cache_trim_work = &per_cpu(cache_trim_work, cpu);
>>  
>>  	/*
>>  	 * When this gets called from do_initcalls via cpucache_init(),
>>  	 * init_workqueues() has already run, so keventd will be setup
>>  	 * at that time.
>>  	 */
>> -	if (keventd_up() && cache_trim_work->work.func == NULL) {
>> -		INIT_DELAYED_WORK(cache_trim_work, cache_trim_worker);
>> -		schedule_delayed_work_on(cpu, cache_trim_work,
>> +	if (keventd_up() && _cache_trim_work->work.func == NULL) {
>> +		INIT_DELAYED_WORK(_cache_trim_work, cache_trim_worker);
>> +		schedule_delayed_work_on(cpu, _cache_trim_work,
>>  					__round_jiffies_relative(HZ, cpu));
> 
> How about calling the local var "trim"?
> 
> This actually makes the code more readable, IMHO.

Please ignore this version of the patch. After this I sent a new one
which changes the global var name.

So the local variable is untouched there. If you want me to perform the
cleanup, let me know. In any case I'd make it trim_work instead of trim
which makes more sense to me.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/