[lkml]   [1999]   [Jan]   [30]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [patch] down_norecurse(), down_interruptible_norecurse(), up_norecurse()
    On Sat, 30 Jan 1999, Tim Waugh wrote:

    > MUTEX_NORECURSE probably isn't for a mutex -- it's semaphores that don't
    > want recursion. It would be nicer to have something like
    > SEMAPHORE(initval). If I thought long enough about it, I'm fairly sure I
    > could come up with a situation where you'd want to initialise a semaphore
    > to >1.

    Ok. I think the MUTEX word was to tell that you wanted a semaphore
    initialized to 1 (as a mutex unlocked), but agreed, SEMAPHORE(x) looks a
    better name for the norecursive semaphore initializer.

    Andrea Arcangeli

    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:50    [W:0.018 / U:9.532 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site