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

!MAILaRCHIVE_VOTE_RePLACE
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
To: Matthias Kaehlcke <matthias.kaehlcke@...>, <chas@...>, <ecd@...>, <linux-kernel@...>
Date: Sunday, April 22, 2007 - 7:52 pm

On 4/23/07, Matthias Kaehlcke <matthias.kaehlcke@gmail.com> wrote:

Note that you're actually replacing a semaphore with a mutex here (and
not a mutex with a spinlock). I guess that should be fine and
desirable as long as the semaphore was indeed being used a mutex
(binary) in this code.
-
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
[PATCH] use spinlock instead of binary mutex in idt77252 dri..., Matthias Kaehlcke, (Sun Apr 22, 5:39 pm)
Re: [PATCH] use spinlock instead of binary mutex in idt77252..., Satyam Sharma, (Sun Apr 22, 7:52 pm)
Re: [PATCH] use spinlock instead of binary mutex in idt77252..., Christoph Hellwig, (Mon Apr 23, 4:17 am)
Re: [PATCH] use spinlock instead of binary mutex in idt77252..., Matthias Kaehlcke, (Mon Apr 23, 4:35 am)
Re: [PATCH] use spinlock instead of binary mutex in idt77252..., Matthias Kaehlcke, (Mon Apr 23, 2:55 am)
Re: [PATCH] use spinlock instead of binary mutex in idt77252..., Matthias Kaehlcke, (Mon Apr 23, 3:40 am)
Re: [PATCH] use spinlock instead of binary mutex in idt77252..., Matthias Kaehlcke, (Mon Apr 23, 3:57 am)