Re: [patch 00/15] Generic Mutex Subsystem

[Arjan van de Ven]

> > Then code can switch to "struct mutex" if people want to. And if one 
> > reason for it ends up being that the code avoids a performance bug in the 
> > process, all the better ;)
> > 
> 
> Is this a good idea? Then we will have for a long time different
> bits of code with exactly the same synchronisation requirements
> using two different constructs that are slightly different. Not to
> mention code specifically requiring semaphores would get confusing.
> 
> If we agree mutex is a good idea at all (and I think it is), then
> wouldn't it be better to aim for a wholesale conversion rather than
> "if people want to"?

well most of this will "only" take a few kernel releases ;-)


-
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/