lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2005]   [Dec]   [13]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 1/19] MUTEX: Introduce simple mutex implementation
On Mon, Dec 12, 2005 at 09:57:40PM -0500, Mark Lord wrote:
> This will BREAK a lot of out-of-tree stuff if merged.

Well, bad luck for them.

> The simplest way would be to NOT re-use the up()/down() symbols,
> but rather to either keep them as-is (counting semaphores),
> or delete them entirely (so that external code *knows* of the change).

That I agree with actually. Keeping the semaphore interface as-is
would simplify in-kernel transition a lot aswell and make it easier for
people to get the API read. And the mutex symbols could get far more sensible
names like mutex_lock, mutex_unlock and mutex_trylock..
-
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 10:09    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans