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

* Ingo Molnar <[email protected]> wrote:

> > On Tue, Dec 13, 2005 at 08:54:41AM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > > - i did not touch the 'struct semaphore' namespace, but introduced a
> > >   'struct compat_semaphore'.
> > 
> > Because it's totally braindead.  Your compat_semaphore is a real 
> > semaphore and your semaphore is a mutex.  So name them as such.
> 
> well, i had the choice between a 30K patch, a 300K patch and a 3000K 
> patch. I went for the 30K patch ;-)

in that sense i'm all for going for the 300K patch, which is roughly the 
direction David is heading into: rename to 'struct mutex' but keep the 
down/up APIs, and introduce sem_down()/sem_up()/ for the cases that need 
full semaphores.

i dont think the 3000K patch (full API rename, introduction of 
mutex_down()/mutex_up()) is realistic.

	Ingo
-
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: David Howells <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH 1/19] MUTEX: Introduce simple mutex implementation
    • From: Paul Jackson <[email protected]>

• References:
  • [PATCH 1/19] MUTEX: Introduce simple mutex implementation
    • From: David Howells <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH 1/19] MUTEX: Introduce simple mutex implementation
    • From: Andrew Morton <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH 1/19] MUTEX: Introduce simple mutex implementation
    • From: Ingo Molnar <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH 1/19] MUTEX: Introduce simple mutex implementation
    • From: Christoph Hellwig <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH 1/19] MUTEX: Introduce simple mutex implementation
    • From: Ingo Molnar <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH 1/19] MUTEX: Introduce simple mutex implementation
• Next by Date: Re: Fwd: [RFC][PATCH] Prevent overriding of Symbols in the Kernel, avoiding Undefined behaviour
• 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]