Re: [PATCH] use spinlock instead of binary mutex in idt77252 driver

On Apr 22, 2007, at 17:39:59, Matthias Kaehlcke wrote:

use spinlock instead of binary mutex in idt77252 driver

I think you really meant: "Use mutex instead of binary semaphore in idt77252 driver", since this is a binary semaphore (not a mutex, which are always binary):

-	struct semaphore	mutex;

and this is a mutex, not a spinlock:

+	struct mutex		mutex;

Everything else looks good though

Cheers,
Kyle Moffett
-
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] use spinlock instead of binary mutex in idt77252 driver
    • From: Christoph Hellwig <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH] use spinlock instead of binary mutex in idt77252 driver
    • From: Matthias Kaehlcke <[email protected]>

• References:
  • [PATCH] use spinlock instead of binary mutex in idt77252 driver
    • From: Matthias Kaehlcke <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH] Add missing USRobotics Wireless Adapter (Model 5423) id into zd1211rw
• Next by Date: Re: [BUG? -rc7] SMP: Just one CPU activated: P4 3GHz HT
• Previous by thread: [PATCH] use spinlock instead of binary mutex in idt77252 driver
• Next by thread: Re: [PATCH] use spinlock instead of binary mutex in idt77252 driver
• 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]