[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20080826195051.GF23698@parisc-linux.org>
Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2008 13:50:51 -0600
From: Matthew Wilcox <matthew@....cx>
To: Daniel Walker <dwalker@...sta.com>
Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Len Brown <len.brown@...el.com>,
Robert Moore <robert.moore@...el.com>,
linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] acpi: semaphore removal
On Tue, Aug 26, 2008 at 12:30:46PM -0700, Daniel Walker wrote:
> On Tue, 2008-08-26 at 13:13 -0600, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 26, 2008 at 11:59:49AM -0700, Daniel Walker wrote:
> > > The semaphore usage in ACPI is more like completions. The ASL
> >
> > Huh? They are semaphores. They're not 'more like completions' at all.
>
> You can clearly make a completion out of a semaphore, but we have a
> completion API .. ACPI is using locked semaphores, and essentially
> re-making completions with the semaphore API..
What makes you think that?
executer/excreate.c: status = acpi_os_create_semaphore(ACPI_NO_UNIT_LIMIT, 0,
executer/exsystem.c: acpi_os_create_semaphore(ACPI_NO_UNIT_LIMIT, 0, &temp_semaphore);
namespace/nsaccess.c: acpi_os_create_semaphore(1, 0,
osl.c:acpi_os_create_semaphore(u32 max_units, u32 initial_units, acpi_handle * handle)
All users set 'initial_units' to 0.
--
Matthew Wilcox Intel Open Source Technology Centre
"Bill, look, we understand that you're interested in selling us this
operating system, but compare it to ours. We can't possibly take such
a retrograde step."
--
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