From: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
To: gregkh@suse.de
Cc: hidave.darkstar@gmail.com, greg@kroah.com, peterz@infradead.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-usb@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/12] Use mutex instead of semaphore in driver core
Date: Tue, 01 Jan 2008 21:25:01 -0800 (PST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20080101.212501.00751091.davem@davemloft.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20080102051828.GA24431@suse.de>
From: Greg KH <gregkh@suse.de>
Date: Tue, 1 Jan 2008 21:18:28 -0800
> But is the usage of this semaphore in the class code really a problem?
> Has it been seen to cause issues anywhere? Does it show up on any
> benchmarks as being something that really needs to be replaced?
It's a question of maintainability and simplicity also Greg.
I actually have no idea why you're making any sort of fuss about this.
To me it's so clear cut that we should do that.
Mutexes provide a much simpler locking technology. The things that
semaphores can do that mutexes can't are rarely if ever used.
Therefore it's better to convert all of those cases only using the
simpler semantic set of mutexes from semaphores.
And we've been converting the entire tree this way for about 2 years,
I'm sorry that you've only just noticed that this is happening and
that there is general agreement that in general all such conversions
should be made.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-01-02 5:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-12-29 1:01 [PATCH 01/12] Use mutex instead of semaphore in driver core Dave Young
2007-12-29 1:29 ` Peter Zijlstra
2007-12-29 1:36 ` Dave Young
2007-12-29 1:40 ` Dave Young
2007-12-29 1:42 ` Peter Zijlstra
2007-12-29 1:52 ` Dave Young
2007-12-29 1:57 ` Peter Zijlstra
2007-12-29 2:03 ` Dave Young
2007-12-29 2:36 ` Dave Young
2007-12-29 4:42 ` Greg KH
2007-12-29 5:06 ` Dave Young
2007-12-29 7:07 ` Dave Young
2007-12-29 17:07 ` Greg KH
2008-01-02 0:54 ` Dave Young
2008-01-02 5:18 ` Greg KH
2008-01-02 5:25 ` David Miller [this message]
2008-01-02 7:00 ` Greg KH
2008-01-02 7:52 ` David Miller
2008-01-02 12:39 ` Jarek Poplawski
2008-01-02 13:12 ` Jarek Poplawski
2008-01-02 16:08 ` Alan Stern
2008-01-03 1:00 ` Dave Young
2008-01-02 5:37 ` Dave Young
2007-12-29 22:01 ` Alan Stern
2007-12-30 6:42 ` David Brownell
2007-12-30 12:13 ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-01-08 16:54 ` Jiri Kosina
2008-01-02 0:58 ` Dave Young
2008-01-02 16:06 ` Alan Stern
2008-01-05 9:30 ` Andrew Morton
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20080101.212501.00751091.davem@davemloft.net \
--to=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=greg@kroah.com \
--cc=gregkh@suse.de \
--cc=hidave.darkstar@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-usb@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox