From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ingo Molnar Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2005 16:28:36 +0000 Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] 'spinlock/rwlock fixes' V3 [1/1] Message-Id: <20050120162836.GA14726@elte.hu> List-Id: References: <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> <20050120023445.GA3475@taniwha.stupidest.org> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Chris Wedgwood , Paul Mackerras , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Peter Chubb , Tony Luck , Darren Williams , Andrew Morton , Benjamin Herrenschmidt , Ia64 Linux , Christoph Hellwig , William Lee Irwin III , Jesse Barnes * Linus Torvalds wrote: > And it probably should be in , since that is where > the actual implementation is, and doesn't really > have any clue what the rules are, and shouldn't act like it has. historically spinlock.h had the full implementation of both spinlock variants: spinlocks and rwlocks. (hey, you implemented it first and put it there! :-) Then came Ben's rwsems that wanted pieces of rw-spinlocks, so rwlock.h was created with the shared bits. one thing i was thinking about was to move most but the assembly to asm-generic/spinlock.h. Almost every architecture shares the spinlock type definitions and shares most of the non-assembly functions. Ingo