* [PATCH] remove wake_up_all_sync
@ 2004-09-07 15:11 Christoph Hellwig
2004-09-07 16:59 ` Alan Cox
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Christoph Hellwig @ 2004-09-07 15:11 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: akpm; +Cc: linux-kernel
no user in sight
--- 1.20/include/linux/wait.h 2004-08-31 10:00:22 +02:00
+++ edited/include/linux/wait.h 2004-09-07 15:56:53 +02:00
@@ -129,7 +129,6 @@
#define wake_up(x) __wake_up(x, TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE | TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE, 1, NULL)
#define wake_up_nr(x, nr) __wake_up(x, TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE | TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE, nr, NULL)
#define wake_up_all(x) __wake_up(x, TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE | TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE, 0, NULL)
-#define wake_up_all_sync(x) __wake_up_sync((x),TASK_UNINTERRUPTIBLE | TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE, 0)
#define wake_up_interruptible(x) __wake_up(x, TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE, 1, NULL)
#define wake_up_interruptible_nr(x, nr) __wake_up(x, TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE, nr, NULL)
#define wake_up_interruptible_all(x) __wake_up(x, TASK_INTERRUPTIBLE, 0, NULL)
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] remove wake_up_all_sync
2004-09-07 15:11 [PATCH] remove wake_up_all_sync Christoph Hellwig
@ 2004-09-07 16:59 ` Alan Cox
2004-09-07 18:05 ` Christoph Hellwig
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Alan Cox @ 2004-09-07 16:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Christoph Hellwig; +Cc: akpm, Linux Kernel Mailing List
On Maw, 2004-09-07 at 16:11, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> no user in sight
That doesn't mean its not a logical part of the API, and since its a
define one which has zero cost in being present. I think you are taking
things beyond the ridiculous in this area.
Alan
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] remove wake_up_all_sync
2004-09-07 16:59 ` Alan Cox
@ 2004-09-07 18:05 ` Christoph Hellwig
2004-09-07 17:26 ` Alan Cox
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Christoph Hellwig @ 2004-09-07 18:05 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Alan Cox; +Cc: Christoph Hellwig, akpm, Linux Kernel Mailing List
On Tue, Sep 07, 2004 at 05:59:58PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote:
> On Maw, 2004-09-07 at 16:11, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > no user in sight
>
> That doesn't mean its not a logical part of the API, and since its a
> define one which has zero cost in being present. I think you are taking
> things beyond the ridiculous in this area.
The sync wakeups are an absolutely special case, we're only using them
in the pipe code on __wake_up_parent. If you think it's a logical part
of the API were would you want to use it for?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2004-09-07 18:32 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2004-09-07 15:11 [PATCH] remove wake_up_all_sync Christoph Hellwig
2004-09-07 16:59 ` Alan Cox
2004-09-07 18:05 ` Christoph Hellwig
2004-09-07 17:26 ` Alan Cox
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox