Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 8 Feb 2002 08:13:00 -0700 | From | yodaiken@fsmlabs ... | Subject | Re: [RFC] New locking primitive for 2.5 |
| |
On Fri, Feb 08, 2002 at 10:47:24AM -0200, Denis Vlasenko wrote: > On 7 February 2002 17:56, yodaiken@fsmlabs.com wrote: > > > If a spin_lock request is blocked by a mutex_lock call, the spin_lock > > > attempt also sleeps i.e. behaves like a semaphore. > > > > So what's the difference between combi_spin and combi_mutex? > > combi_spin becomes > > if not mutex locked, spin > > else sleep > > Bizzare > > combi_spin_lock(): > If not mutex locked, spin - will be released shortly > else sleep - may take long time before released > * lock released * > spin lock it! <=== this is the difference - > combi_mutex_lock would mutex lock it here > > What's wrong with this?
In the elegant words of Andrew Morton, this is a "I don't know what the fuck I'm doing lock".
-- --------------------------------------------------------- Victor Yodaiken Finite State Machine Labs: The RTLinux Company. www.fsmlabs.com www.rtlinux.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/
| |