Re: [PATCH 1/19] MUTEX: Introduce simple mutex implementation

Thomas Gleixner
2005-12-14T13:52:14Z

On Wed, 2005-12-14 at 12:35 +0000, David Howells wrote:
> Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> wrote:
>
> > Why bother. As has already been discussed up and down are the natural
> > and normal names for counting semaphores. You don't need to obsolete the
> > old API thats just silly, you need to add a new one and wait for people
> > to use it.
>
> The vast majority of ups and downs are actually mutex related not semaphore
> related, so by majority share, up/down perhaps ought to be repurposed to
> mutexes: they _are_ the preeminent uses.
>
> From my modified tree, I see:
>
> semaphore up down down_in down_try
> Counting 41 59 1 0
> Mutex 4405 2824 362 107
>
> > The old API is still very useful for some applications that want
> > counting semaphores.
>
> Whilst that is true, they're in a small minority, and it'd be easier to change
> them.

You can do a full scripted rename of up/down to the mutex API and then
fix up the 100 places used by semaphores manually.

tglx