[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20080107172009.GA25943@suse.de>
Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2008 09:20:09 -0800
From: Greg KH <gregkh@...e.de>
To: Stefan Richter <stefanr@...6.in-berlin.de>
Cc: James.Bottomley@...senpartnership.com,
dbrownell@...rs.sourceforge.net,
Dave Young <hidave.darkstar@...il.com>,
linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org, a.zummo@...ertech.it,
peterz@...radead.org, cbou@...l.ru, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
David Brownell <david-b@...bell.net>, krh@...hat.com,
stern@...land.harvard.edu, rtc-linux@...glegroups.com,
spi-devel-general@...ts.sourceforge.net,
linux1394-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net, dwmw2@...radead.org,
davem@...emloft.net, jarkao2@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/7] convert semaphore to mutex in struct class
On Mon, Jan 07, 2008 at 06:13:37PM +0100, Stefan Richter wrote:
> It's already in the driver core to the most part. It remains to be seen
> what is less complicated in the end: Transparent mutex-protected list
> accesses provided by driver core (requires the iterator), or all the
> necessary locking done by the drivers themselves (requires some more
> lock-taking but perhaps fewer lock instances overall in the drivers, and
> respective redefinitions and documentation of the driver core API).
I favor changing the driver core api and doing this kind of thing there.
It keeps the drivers simpler and should hopefully make their lives
easier.
> Semi off-topic: What about struct device.sem? Is there any chance to
> rip this out of the driver core and let drivers serialize everything? I
> suppose not...
See the previous long threads about this very topic, that is what caused
this class.sem patches :)
thanks,
greg k-h
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists