[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20080226102149.GE20322@shadowen.org>
Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2008 10:21:49 +0000
From: Andy Whitcroft <apw@...dowen.org>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Pekka Paalanen <pq@....fi>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>,
Pavel Roskin <proski@....org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
Subject: Re: [RFC] mmiotrace full patch, preview 1
On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 06:34:49PM -0500, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 02:49:22PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > the things which it finds.
> >
> > > +static DECLARE_MUTEX(kmmio_init_mutex);
> >
> > That's not a mutex.
> >
> > > + down(&kmmio_init_mutex);
> >
> > It's a semaphore. Please do convert it to a mutex.
> >
> > Andy, I'd say that addition of new semaphores is worth a warning - they're
> > rarely legitimate.
>
> I'm not sure that any semaphore should be a warning, but the initializer
> for semaphore used as binary mutex (DECLARE_MUTEX and init_MUTEX) are
> worth it.
Ok, so that would be the following, work for everyone?
WARNING: mutexes are preferred for single holder semaphores
#1: FILE: Z95.c:1:
+ DECLARE_MUTEX(&foo);
WARNING: mutexes are preferred for single holder semaphores
#3: FILE: Z95.c:3:
+ init_MUTEX(&foo);
-apw
--
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