Re: [PATCH 1/19] MUTEX: Introduce simple mutex implementation

On Mon, 2005-12-12 at 23:45 +0000, David Howells wrote:

>  (1) Provides a simple xchg() based semaphore as a default for all
>      architectures that don't wish to override it and provide their own.
> 
>      Overriding is possible by setting CONFIG_ARCH_IMPLEMENTS_MUTEX and
>      supplying asm/mutex.h
> 
>      Partial overriding is possible by #defining mutex_grab(), mutex_release()
>      and is_mutex_locked() to perform the appropriate optimised functions.

Your code is really similar to the RT mutex, which does everything that
your mutex does at least ? Assuming you've reviewed the RT mutex, why
would we want to use yours over it?

Daniel

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

---

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: [PATCH 1/19] MUTEX: Introduce simple mutex implementation
    • From: Steven Rostedt <[email protected]>

• References:
  • [PATCH 1/19] MUTEX: Introduce simple mutex implementation
    • From: David Howells <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: [Lse-tech] [RFC][Patch 1/5] nanosecond timestamps and diffs
• Next by Date: Re: [PATCH] PCI express must be initialized before PCI hotplug
• Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH 1/19] MUTEX: Introduce simple mutex implementation
• Next by thread: Re: [PATCH 1/19] MUTEX: Introduce simple mutex implementation
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Stuff]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]     [Linux Resources]