Re: [RFC] New locking primitive for 2.5

Denis Vlasenko
2002-02-08T08:51:11Z

On 7 February 2002 17:56, yodaiken@fsmlabs.com wrote:
> > If a spin_lock request is blocked by a mutex_lock call, the spin_lock
> > attempt also sleeps i.e. behaves like a semaphore.
>
> So what's the difference between combi_spin and combi_mutex?
> combi_spin becomes
> if not mutex locked, spin
> else sleep
> Bizzare

combi_spin_lock():
If not mutex locked, spin - will be released shortly
else sleep - may take long time before released
* lock released *
spin lock it! <=== this is the difference -
combi_mutex_lock would mutex lock it here

What's wrong with this?
--
vda