Re: Announce: Semaphore-Removal tree

[Daniel Walker <dwalker@mvista.com>]

On Fri, 2008-04-25 at 11:00 -0600, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> It's been a Good Idea for a while to use mutexes instead of
> semaphores where possible.  Additional debuggability, better optimised,
> better-enforced semantics, etc.
> 
> Obviously, there are some places that can't be converted to mutexes.
> I'm not proposing blind changes.  I've been through a dozen places
> and found some that can be converted to spinlocks, others to
> completions, but mostly to mutexes.  So as not to lose these patches,
> I've made them available as a git tree.  I think the right way to get
> these patches in will be to go through the maintainers of each file.
> 
> I'll post a list of the places using semaphores later.  My current list
> is a bit out of date and contains insulting comments that I would like
> to rephrase before the authors of the code in question see them ;-)

I've got a bunch of these if you want to incorporate them.. I've been
slowly trickling them up stream ..

Daniel