Re: [PATCH] use spinlock instead of binary mutex in idt77252 driver

[Matthias Kaehlcke <matthias.kaehlcke@gmail.com>]

El Mon, Apr 23, 2007 at 09:17:53AM +0100 Christoph Hellwig ha dit:

> On Sun, Apr 22, 2007 at 07:50:36PM -0400, Kyle Moffett wrote:
> > On Apr 22, 2007, at 17:39:59, Matthias Kaehlcke wrote:
> > >use spinlock instead of binary mutex in idt77252 driver
> > 
> > I think you really meant: "Use mutex instead of binary semaphore in  
> > idt77252 driver", since this is a binary semaphore (not a mutex,  
> > which are always binary):
> 
> And the binary semaphore terminology i a little confusing. struct
> semaphore is a full counting semaphore that is only used as a binary
> semaphore if we want to speak in CS terms.  Than everyone else just
> caled them semaphore before these patches started to show up :)

i'll take your suggestion into account for future patches. my
intention behind the usage of the term binary semaphore was to be more
precise, but i agree that it can be confusing

-- 
Matthias Kaehlcke
Linux Application Developer
Barcelona

    I am incapable of conceiving infinity, and yet I do not accept finity
                          (Simone de Beauvoir)
                                                                 .''`.
    using free software / Debian GNU/Linux | http://debian.org  : :'  :
                                                                `. `'`
gpg --keyserver pgp.mit.edu --recv-keys 47D8E5D4                  `-