![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Fri, 2005-12-16 at 23:13 +0000, David Howells wrote: >>This patch set does the following: >> >> (1) Renames DECLARE_MUTEX and DECLARE_MUTEX_LOCKED to be DECLARE_SEM_MUTEX and >> DECLARE_SEM_MUTEX_LOCKED for counting semaphores. >> > > > Could we really get rid of that "MUTEX" part. A counting semaphore is > _not_ a mutex, although a mutex _is_ a counting semaphore. As is a Jack > Russell is a dog, but a dog is not a Jack Russell. > Really? A Jack Russell is a dog because anything you say about a dog can also be said about a Jack Russell. A counting semaphore is a mutex for the same reason (and observe that 99% of users use the semaphore as a mutex). A mutex definitely is not a counting semaphore. David's implementation of mutexes don't count at all. If you want to use a semaphore as a mutex, DECLARE_SEM_MUTEX isn't a terrible name. -- SUSE Labs, Novell Inc. Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.yahoo.com - 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: 2005-12-17 08:58 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||||