I will make it static. This helps to avoid an accidental usage.
- Gedare Bloom schrieb:
> I'm not a big fan of this "watchdog_remove_it" terminology. Can I
> suggest the state be called something else like WATCHDOG_REMOVING or
> maybe WATCHDOG_TRANSIENT, and perhaps the actual removal functi
I'm not a big fan of this "watchdog_remove_it" terminology. Can I
suggest the state be called something else like WATCHDOG_REMOVING or
maybe WATCHDOG_TRANSIENT, and perhaps the actual removal function be
renamed _Watchdog_Remove_internal() or something similar? Also, given
the refactoring here and
Rewrite the _Watchdog_Insert(), _Watchdog_Remove() and
_Watchdog_Tickle() functions to use interator items to synchronize
concurrent operations. This makes it possible to get rid of the global
variables _Watchdog_Sync_level and _Watchdog_Sync_count which are a
blocking point for scalable SMP solut
