[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <200804220215.30855.rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2008 02:15:30 +1000
From: Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>
To: Matthew Wilcox <matthew@....cx>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
"Randy.Dunlap" <rdunlap@...otime.net>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>
Subject: Re: [DOC PATCH] Remove mention of semaphores from kernel-locking
On Tuesday 22 April 2008 00:52:30 Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> Since the consensus seems to be to eliminate semaphores where possible,
> we shouldn't be educating people about how to use them as locks.
Agreed.
> Use
> mutexes instead. Semaphores should be described in a separate document
> if we end up keeping them.
>
> Signed-off-by: Matthew Wilcox <willy@...ux.intel.com>
>
> (I'll put this patch in the semaphore git tree tomorrow unless I hear
> complaints.)
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/DocBook/kernel-locking.tmpl
> b/Documentation/DocBook/kernel-locking.tmpl index 435413c..e1f4655 100644
> --- a/Documentation/DocBook/kernel-locking.tmpl
> +++ b/Documentation/DocBook/kernel-locking.tmpl
> @@ -222,7 +222,7 @@
> <title>Three Main Types of Kernel Locks: Spinlocks, Mutexes and
> Semaphores</title>
>
> <para>
> - There are three main types of kernel locks. The fundamental type
> + There are two main types of kernel locks. The fundamental type
> is the spinlock
> (<filename class="headerfile">include/asm/spinlock.h</filename>),
> which is a very simple single-holder lock: if you can't get the
Fix title, too?
Thanks for the other fixes too; this document needs some love,
Acked,
Rusty.
--
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