Re: [PATCH 3/8] ppc64: add a watchdog driver for rtas

[Arnd Bergmann]

On Middeweken 18 Mai 2005 16:45, Nathan Lynch wrote:
> 
> > A semaphore would also be the wrong approach since we don't want
> > processes to block but instead to fail opening the watchdog twice.
> 
> I should have been more explicit.  What I had in mind was using
> down_trylock and returning -EBUSY if it failed.

Well, that's also pointless. If the only operations you ever do
on a semaphore are down_trylock() and up(), you end up using
only the atomic variable in there while wasting a few bytes of
extra memory for storing the wait queue head ;-)

	Arnd <><
-
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/