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

* David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com> wrote:

> Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> wrote:
>
> > > init_MUTEX_LOCKED()
> > > DECLARE_MUTEX_LOCKED()
> >
> > please kill these two in the simple mutex implementation - they are a
> > sign of mutexes used as completions.
>
> That can be done later. It's not necessary to do it in this particular
> patch set.

i disagree - it's necessary that we dont build complexities into the
'simple' mutex type, or the whole game starts again. I.e. the 'owner
unlocks the mutex' rule must be enforced - which makes
DECLARE_MUTEX_LOCKED() meaningless.

Ingo
-
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 14:50    [W:0.102 / U:4.844 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site