From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Grant Grundler Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2005 05:49:35 +0000 Subject: Re: Horrible regression with -CURRENT from "Don't busy-lock-loop in preemptable spinlocks" patch Message-Id: <20050120054935.GC11410@esmail.cup.hp.com> List-Id: References: <20050117055044.GA3514@taniwha.stupidest.org> <20050116230922.7274f9a2.akpm@osdl.org> <20050117143301.GA10341@elte.hu> <20050118014752.GA14709@cse.unsw.EDU.AU> <16877.42598.336096.561224@wombat.chubb.wattle.id.au> <20050119080403.GB29037@elte.hu> <16878.9678.73202.771962@wombat.chubb.wattle.id.au> <20050119092013.GA2045@elte.hu> <16878.54402.344079.528038@cargo.ozlabs.ibm.com> In-Reply-To: <16878.54402.344079.528038@cargo.ozlabs.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Paul Mackerras Cc: Ingo Molnar , Peter Chubb , Tony Luck , Darren Williams , Andrew Morton , Chris Wedgwood , torvalds@osdl.org, benh@kernel.crashing.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ia64 Linux , Christoph Hellwig On Thu, Jan 20, 2005 at 08:43:30AM +1100, Paul Mackerras wrote: > I suggest read_poll(), write_poll(), spin_poll(),... Erm...those names sound way too much like existing interfaces. Perhaps check_read_lock()/check_write_lock() ? If they don't get used too much, the longer name should be ok. grant