Re: [PATCH 1/4] mutex: add mutex_lock_timeout()

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
From: Andi Kleen
Date: Tuesday, August 26, 2008 - 12:32 pm

Daniel,

My decision on this patchkit is to reject it for now, because:

- I'm worried about the long term maintenance impact of doing full
lockdep checking on AML controlled locks. Since I'm keeping ACPI
only temporarily I don't want to leave an potentially problematic
legacy.
- I fail to see the advantage of implementing semaphores using conditions.

However what you can do is to ask Len again when he's back. Ultimately
it is his decision and he might decide that he can deal with AML lockdep
issues longer term.

Don't think it makes all that much sense to resubmit the completion
patch though. It's unrelated to the other patches anyways (not sure
why you mix them together)

-Andi
--
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
[PATCH 1/4] mutex: add mutex_lock_timeout(), Daniel Walker, (Tue Aug 26, 11:59 am)
[PATCH 2/4] acpi: add real mutex function calls, Daniel Walker, (Tue Aug 26, 11:59 am)
[PATCH 3/4] acpi: add lockdep magic, Daniel Walker, (Tue Aug 26, 11:59 am)
[PATCH 4/4] acpi: semaphore removal, Daniel Walker, (Tue Aug 26, 11:59 am)
Re: [PATCH 4/4] acpi: semaphore removal, Matthew Wilcox, (Tue Aug 26, 12:13 pm)
Re: [PATCH 4/4] acpi: semaphore removal, Daniel Walker, (Tue Aug 26, 12:30 pm)
Re: [PATCH 1/4] mutex: add mutex_lock_timeout(), Andi Kleen, (Tue Aug 26, 12:32 pm)
Re: [PATCH 4/4] acpi: semaphore removal, Matthew Wilcox, (Tue Aug 26, 12:50 pm)
Re: [PATCH 1/4] mutex: add mutex_lock_timeout(), Daniel Walker, (Tue Aug 26, 12:51 pm)
Re: [PATCH 4/4] acpi: semaphore removal, Daniel Walker, (Tue Aug 26, 1:03 pm)
Re: [PATCH 1/4] mutex: add mutex_lock_timeout(), Andi Kleen, (Tue Aug 26, 2:13 pm)
Re: [PATCH 1/4] mutex: add mutex_lock_timeout(), Daniel Walker, (Tue Aug 26, 3:09 pm)