Re: [patch] Real-Time Preemption, -RT-2.6.9-rc4-mm1-U8

[Jens Axboe]

On Thu, Oct 21 2004, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> 
> * Jens Axboe <axboe@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> > I didn't look at the USB code, I'm just saying that it's perfectly
> > valid use of a semaphore the pattern you describe (process A holding
> > it, process B releasing it).
> 
> yes, that is perfectly true, and sorry if we gave you the wrong
> impression.
> 
> the goal of these patches is to do a semaphore->completion conversion in
> cases where the semaphore was used for completion purposes. It's a bit
> faster and more readable but not a 'bugfix' in any way. (another set of
> patches are converting sleep_on() uses to wait_event*() plus waitqueues
> - those can in fact be considered bugfixes in some cases.)
> 
> typically the cases where semaphores are held by one task and released
> by another task happens coincide with this used-for-completion scenario.

Thanks for the explanation, I can agree with that.

-- 
Jens Axboe

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/