From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Grant Grundler Subject: [parisc-linux] Re: [patch] spinlock consolidation, v2 Date: Mon, 6 Jun 2005 11:55:54 -0600 Message-ID: <20050606175554.GD24437@colo.lackof.org> References: <20050603173132.GX14929@parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk> <20050606060512.GB30857@colo.lackof.org> <20050606073627.GA10387@elte.hu> <20050606151232.GA24437@colo.lackof.org> <20050606163141.GA15703@elte.hu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: parisc-linux@parisc-linux.org, Matthew Wilcox To: Ingo Molnar Return-Path: In-Reply-To: <20050606163141.GA15703@elte.hu> List-Id: parisc-linux developers list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: parisc-linux-bounces@lists.parisc-linux.org On Mon, Jun 06, 2005 at 06:31:41PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > They are arch specific types (asm/spinlock_types.h) and I'm only using > > raw_spinlock_t in arch specific code. > > please dont use the raw spinlocks. They dont carry some features such as > debugging. (or any other future feature of the generic spinlock_t type) > TBH, I'd rather not use them. Please look at the -02 patch I just sent and advise on how you think the cyclic dependency can be killed. raw spinlocks is obviously just one way. thanks, grant _______________________________________________ parisc-linux mailing list parisc-linux@lists.parisc-linux.org http://lists.parisc-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/parisc-linux