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

[Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>]

* Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org> wrote:

> > even better than that, why not use the solution that we've implemented 
> > for the -rt patchset, more than a year ago?
> > 
> > the solution i took was this:
> > 
> > - i did not touch the 'struct semaphore' namespace, but introduced a
> >   'struct compat_semaphore'.
> 
> which I think is wrong. THis naming sucks. Sure doing a full sed on 
> the tree is not pretty but it's also not THAT painful. And the pain of 
> wrong names is something the kernel needs to carry around for years.

well, i'm all for renaming struct semaphore to struct mutex, but dont 
the same arguments apply as to 'struct timer_list'?

just to see the scope, i've attached semaphore-to-mutex.patch, which 
just dumbly converts all 'struct semaphore' occurances to 'struct 
mutex', against Linus-git-curr:

 405 files changed, 568 insertions(+), 568 deletions(-)

it's not _that_ bad, if done overnight. It does not touch any of the 
down/up APIs. Touching those would create a monster patch and monster 
impact.

	Ingo

Attachment: semaphore-to-mutex.patch.bz2
Description: BZip2 compressed data