On Thu, 15 Dec 2005, David Howells wrote: > > FROM TO > ============================== ========================= > DECLARE_MUTEX DECLARE_SEM_MUTEX > DECLARE_MUTEX_LOCKED DECLARE_SEM_MUTEX_LOCKED > Proper counting semaphore DECLARE_SEM That sounds fine. I wouldn't be adverse to doing that - but it would have to be independently of any other changes, and it would need to simmer for a while for out-of-tree drivers etc to notice (ie you should _not_ just introduce a new "DECLARE_MUTEX()" immediately to confuse things). The patch could probably be fairly trivially generated with some trivial sed-script. Not that I'll take it at this point, but after the next release.. Linus - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org 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: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
- Re: [PATCH 1/19] MUTEX: Introduce simple mutex implementation
- From: Nikita Danilov <nikita@clusterfs.com>
- Re: [PATCH 1/19] MUTEX: Introduce simple mutex implementation
- References:
- Re: [PATCH 1/19] MUTEX: Introduce simple mutex implementation
- From: Paul Jackson <pj@sgi.com>
- Re: [PATCH 1/19] MUTEX: Introduce simple mutex implementation
- From: Nikita Danilov <nikita@clusterfs.com>
- Re: [PATCH 1/19] MUTEX: Introduce simple mutex implementation
- From: Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
- Re: [PATCH 1/19] MUTEX: Introduce simple mutex implementation
- From: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
- Re: [PATCH 1/19] MUTEX: Introduce simple mutex implementation
- From: Paul Jackson <pj@sgi.com>
- Re: [PATCH 1/19] MUTEX: Introduce simple mutex implementation
- From: Paul Jackson <pj@sgi.com>
- [PATCH 1/19] MUTEX: Introduce simple mutex implementation
- From: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
- Re: [PATCH 1/19] MUTEX: Introduce simple mutex implementation
- From: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
- Re: [PATCH 1/19] MUTEX: Introduce simple mutex implementation
- From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
- Re: [PATCH 1/19] MUTEX: Introduce simple mutex implementation
- From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
- Re: [PATCH 1/19] MUTEX: Introduce simple mutex implementation
- From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
- Re: [PATCH 1/19] MUTEX: Introduce simple mutex implementation
- From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
- Re: [PATCH 1/19] MUTEX: Introduce simple mutex implementation
- From: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
- Re: [PATCH 1/19] MUTEX: Introduce simple mutex implementation
- From: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
- Re: [PATCH 1/19] MUTEX: Introduce simple mutex implementation
- From: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
- Re: [PATCH 1/19] MUTEX: Introduce simple mutex implementation
- From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
- Re: [PATCH 1/19] MUTEX: Introduce simple mutex implementation
- From: Mark Lord <lkml@rtr.ca>
- Re: [PATCH 1/19] MUTEX: Introduce simple mutex implementation
- From: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
- Re: [PATCH 1/19] MUTEX: Introduce simple mutex implementation
- From: Nikita Danilov <nikita@clusterfs.com>
- Re: [PATCH 1/19] MUTEX: Introduce simple mutex implementation
- From: Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
- Re: [PATCH 1/19] MUTEX: Introduce simple mutex implementation
- From: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
- Re: [PATCH 1/19] MUTEX: Introduce simple mutex implementation
- From: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
- Re: [PATCH 1/19] MUTEX: Introduce simple mutex implementation
- Prev by Date: Re: [patch 6/6] statistics infrastructure - exploitation: zfcp
- Next by Date: Re: [PATCH 2/3] m68k: compile fix - ADBREQ_RAW missing declaration
- 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):
 |