![]() | |||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
* Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> 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 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/ | ||||||||||
| Last update: 2005-12-13 11:03 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||