WARNING - OLD ARCHIVES

This is an archived copy of the Xen.org mailing list, which we have preserved to ensure that existing links to archives are not broken. The live archive, which contains the latest emails, can be found at http://lists.xen.org/
   
 
 
Xen 
 
Home Products Support Community News
 
   
 

xen-devel

[Xen-devel] linux TPM changes question

To: <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [Xen-devel] linux TPM changes question
From: "Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2006 17:37:45 +0100
Delivery-date: Tue, 14 Feb 2006 16:48:52 +0000
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
List-help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>
List-post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
While there has been a new (conditionalized) call to 
del_singleshot_timer_sync() added, the old instance hasn't been
deleted (other than the parallel atomic_set(&chip->data_pending, 0)). Is this 
intentional? If so, how is this supposed
to work?

Thanks, Jan

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>