Re: [patch 04/15] Generic Mutex Subsystem, add-atomic-call-func-x86_64.patch

[Russell King <rmk+lkml@arm.linux.org.uk>]

On Tue, Dec 20, 2005 at 08:32:35PM +0100, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> 
> > So, to sum up, if this path is persued, mutexes will be a bloody
> > disaster on ARM.  We'd be far better off sticking to semaphores
> > and ignoring this mutex stuff.
> 
> on x86 the fastpath is the same for both basically.. is there a
> fundamental reason it can't be for ARM?

If we're talking about implementing mutexes as a semaphore, then they
will be identical.  But what's the point of that?  It's a semaphore
which is just called a mutex.

So you might as well just save the patch noise and do nothing instead.
It seems to me that you'll get _exactly_ the same result with a lot
less effort.

-- 
Russell King
 Linux kernel    2.6 ARM Linux   - http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/
 maintainer of:  2.6 Serial core
-
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/