[lkml]   [2009]   [Apr]   [28]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [PATCH 01/12] mutex: add atomic_dec_and_mutex_lock
    On Tue, 2009-04-28 at 13:27 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
    > On Mon, 27 Apr 2009 17:53:05 -0400
    > Eric Paris <> wrote:
    > > Much like the atomic_dec_and_lock() function in which we take and hold a
    > > spin_lock if we drop the atomic to 0 this function takes and holds the
    > > mutex if we dec the atomic to 0.
    > I sucked these patches into -mm, mainly for a bit of compile-time and
    > runtime testing.
    > I read through them all on the previous iteration. IIRC my main
    > impression was that the code and the data structures were not
    > sufficiently well commented for that review to have been particularly
    > effective. Hopefully things improved there?

    I added hundreds of lines of comments where I hope they will be
    > It would be good if Al and/or hch and/or others could review this work.
    > Christoph has indicated that he will be doing this.
    > You didn't reply to all my review comments from last time, but from a
    > quick random sample I see that some/most comments have been addressed.
    > Hopefully all were at least considered.

    Every comment was considered, I promise!

    > It's a little worrisome that my comment against this particular patch
    > was lost, and the patch was verbatim merged into Ingo's perfcounter
    > branch. Did anything else get lost?

    Actually, by the time you commented on it the patch was already added
    and in use in Ingo's tree, which was why I didn't make the change I
    could (and I will) follow up with another patch to make the requested
    change rather than change this patch.


     \ /
      Last update: 2009-04-29 00:51    [W:0.021 / U:0.516 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site