Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261743AbVCOSkC (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 Mar 2005 13:40:02 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261756AbVCOSiR (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 Mar 2005 13:38:17 -0500 Received: from mail.tv-sign.ru ([213.234.233.51]:28847 "EHLO several.ru") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261647AbVCOSff (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 Mar 2005 13:35:35 -0500 Message-ID: <42373A4C.D9B90D6@tv-sign.ru> Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2005 22:41:00 +0300 From: Oleg Nesterov X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.20 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Christoph Lameter Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Shai Fultheim , Andrew Morton , Ingo Molnar Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] del_timer_sync: proof of concept References: <4231E959.141F7D85@tv-sign.ru> <4237192B.7E8AA85A@tv-sign.ru> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=koi8-r Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 734 Lines: 19 Christoph Lameter wrote: > > However, this also means that __run_timers will not free up the timer and > it has to be explicitly freed with del_timer_??. I am not sure I understand you but no, del_timer{,_sync} is not needed. __run_timer deletes timer from base->tv? list and clears 'pending flag'. __del_timer_sync sets ->_base = NULL, but it is merely optimization. It could set ->_base = base, but in that case next del_timer_sync() call will need spin_lock(base->lock) again. Oleg. - 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/