From 0a0fca9d832b704f116a25badd1ca8c16771dcac Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Viresh Kumar Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2013 13:10:24 +0530 Subject: sched: Rename sched.c as sched/core.c in comments and Documentation Most of the stuff from kernel/sched.c was moved to kernel/sched/core.c long time back and the comments/Documentation never got updated. I figured it out when I was going through sched-domains.txt and so thought of fixing it globally. I haven't crossed check if the stuff that is referenced in sched/core.c by all these files is still present and hasn't changed as that wasn't the motive behind this patch. Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/cdff76a265326ab8d71922a1db5be599f20aad45.1370329560.git.viresh.kumar@linaro.org Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar --- Documentation/spinlocks.txt | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) (limited to 'Documentation/spinlocks.txt') diff --git a/Documentation/spinlocks.txt b/Documentation/spinlocks.txt index 9dbe885ecd8d..97eaf5727178 100644 --- a/Documentation/spinlocks.txt +++ b/Documentation/spinlocks.txt @@ -137,7 +137,7 @@ don't block on each other (and thus there is no dead-lock wrt interrupts. But when you do the write-lock, you have to use the irq-safe version. For an example of being clever with rw-locks, see the "waitqueue_lock" -handling in kernel/sched.c - nothing ever _changes_ a wait-queue from +handling in kernel/sched/core.c - nothing ever _changes_ a wait-queue from within an interrupt, they only read the queue in order to know whom to wake up. So read-locks are safe (which is good: they are very common indeed), while write-locks need to protect themselves against interrupts. -- cgit