On Wed, 2005-12-14 at 12:35 +0000, David Howells wrote: > Alan Cox <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Why bother. As has already been discussed up and down are the natural > > and normal names for counting semaphores. You don't need to obsolete the > > old API thats just silly, you need to add a new one and wait for people > > to use it. > > The vast majority of ups and downs are actually mutex related not semaphore > related, so by majority share, up/down perhaps ought to be repurposed to > mutexes: they _are_ the preeminent uses. > > From my modified tree, I see: > > semaphore up down down_in down_try > Counting 41 59 1 0 > Mutex 4405 2824 362 107 > > > The old API is still very useful for some applications that want > > counting semaphores. > > Whilst that is true, they're in a small minority, and it'd be easier to change > them. You can do a full scripted rename of up/down to the mutex API and then fix up the 100 places used by semaphores manually. tglx - 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:
- References:
- Re: [PATCH 1/19] MUTEX: Introduce simple mutex implementation
- From: Alan Cox <[email protected]>
- 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]>
- Re: [PATCH 1/19] MUTEX: Introduce simple mutex implementation
- From: Paul Jackson <[email protected]>
- [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]>
- Re: [PATCH 1/19] MUTEX: Introduce simple mutex implementation
- From: Ingo Molnar <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 1/19] MUTEX: Introduce simple mutex implementation
- From: David Howells <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 1/19] MUTEX: Introduce simple mutex implementation
- From: David Howells <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 1/19] MUTEX: Introduce simple mutex implementation
- From: David Howells <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 1/19] MUTEX: Introduce simple mutex implementation
- Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH/RFC] SPI: add DMAUNSAFE analog to David Brownell's core
- Next by Date: Re: [ANNOUNCE] 2.6.15-rc5-hrt2 - hrtimers based high resolution patches
- 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):
 |