[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=73VQeBj_M_PJO5OzJJDgWOXHkw31tN4z-nqMu@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2010 14:20:21 -0800
From: Ohad Ben-Cohen <ohad@...ery.com>
To: Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>
Cc: linux-omap@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>, Benoit Cousson <b-cousson@...com>,
Grant Likely <grant.likely@...retlab.ca>,
Hari Kanigeri <h-kanigeri2@...com>, Suman Anna <s-anna@...com>,
Kevin Hilman <khilman@...prootsystems.com>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] drivers: hwspinlock: add generic framework
On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 11:00 AM, Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com> wrote:
> Do we even need the hwspin_lock variants,
I personally don't have any specific use case in mind.
It's just a simple wrapper over the _timeout variants, provided for
API completeness, but -
> why can't we always use the hwspin_lock_timeout variants?
We can. I can just remove the _lock variants.
--
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