From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753961AbXDJWIJ (ORCPT ); Tue, 10 Apr 2007 18:08:09 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753962AbXDJWIJ (ORCPT ); Tue, 10 Apr 2007 18:08:09 -0400 Received: from palinux.external.hp.com ([192.25.206.14]:57973 "EHLO mail.parisc-linux.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753961AbXDJWII (ORCPT ); Tue, 10 Apr 2007 18:08:08 -0400 Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2007 16:08:04 -0600 From: Matthew Wilcox To: "Robert P. J. Day" Cc: Roland Dreier , kernelnewbies@nl.linux.org, kernel-janitors@lists.osdl.org, Jan Engelhardt , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [KJ] remove SPIN_LOCK_UNLOCKED Message-ID: <20070410220804.GI26692@parisc-linux.org> References: <20070410181654.GA10525@arun.site> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Apr 10, 2007 at 05:45:07PM -0400, Robert P. J. Day wrote: > that works fine if you're defining a single spinlock, but what do you > do in cases like this: > > arch/sparc/lib/atomic32.c: [0 ... (ATOMIC_HASH_SIZE-1)] = SPIN_LOCK_UNLOCKED > > that is, when you're assigning an array of them? you still need some > kind of generic, unnamed spinlock in those circumstances, no? That's a special case for architecture-only code. It's not to be used by drivers.