lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2005]   [Dec]   [20]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [patch 00/15] Generic Mutex Subsystem
From
Date

> > Then code can switch to "struct mutex" if people want to. And if one
> > reason for it ends up being that the code avoids a performance bug in the
> > process, all the better ;)
> >
>
> Is this a good idea? Then we will have for a long time different
> bits of code with exactly the same synchronisation requirements
> using two different constructs that are slightly different. Not to
> mention code specifically requiring semaphores would get confusing.
>
> If we agree mutex is a good idea at all (and I think it is), then
> wouldn't it be better to aim for a wholesale conversion rather than
> "if people want to"?

well most of this will "only" take a few kernel releases ;-)


-
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: 2005-12-20 09:09    [W:0.137 / U:0.316 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site