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

> (5) Redirects the following to apply to the new mutexes rather than the
>     traditional semaphores:
>
>	down()
>	down_trylock()
>	down_interruptible()
>	up()

This will BREAK a lot of out-of-tree stuff if merged.

So please figure out some way to hang a HUGE banner out there
so that the external codebases know they need updating.

The simplest way would be to NOT re-use the up()/down() symbols,
but rather to either keep them as-is (counting semaphores),
or delete them entirely (so that external code *knows* of the change).

Cheers
-
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: Christoph Hellwig <[email protected]>
  • 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: [2.6 patch] kernel/resource.c: __check_region(): remove pointless __deprecated
• Next by Date: Re: [PATCH 3/3] [kconfig] Direct use of lxdialog routines by menuconfig
• 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]