Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 22 Dec 2005 09:44:29 -0800 (PST) | From | Linus Torvalds <> | Subject | Re: [patch 00/10] mutex subsystem, -V5 |
| |
On Thu, 22 Dec 2005, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> On Thu, 22 Dec 2005, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > Changes since -V4: > > > > - removed __ARCH_WANT_XCHG_BASED_ATOMICS and implemented > > CONFIG_MUTEX_XCHG_ALGORITHM instead, based on comments from > > Christoph Hellwig. > > > > - updated ARM to use CONFIG_MUTEX_XCHG_ALGORITHM. > > This is still not what I'd like to see, per my previous comments. > > Do you have any strong reason for pursuing that route instead of going > with my suggested approach?
I'd just prefer a
<asm-generic/mutex-xchg-algo.h>
and then any architecture can do whatever they damn well want, and anybody who doesn't want to, can just include that header file.
No #ifdef's, no config options, no "generic fallback". Just unconditionally do the sane thing.
I'm with whoever HATES those stupid __ARCH_xxx #defines. It's a sign of bad design. Either it's a generic algorithm (and it can be in <asm-generic> or it's not). In no case should we ever have __ARCH_HAS_xxx (and yes, that includes cases where we _currently_ use __ARCH_HAS_xxx).
Linus - 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/
| |