On Sat, Nov 27, 2010 at 3:24 AM, David Brownell <david-b@pacbell.net> wrote:
quoted text
> Your intent "generic" is fine, but you've not achieved it and thus I
> think you shouldn't imply that you have.   Dropping the word "generic"
> should  suffice; it _is_ a framework, and maybe the next person working
> with hardware spinlocks can finish generalizing (and add use cases).

Sure, I can drop the word "generic".

quoted text
> Haven't looked at RT in a long time.  Just look at the current RT
> patchset to see if it still has several spinlock variants.  ISTR the
> "raw" spinlock stuff came from there not long ago.  Much compile-time
> magic was involved in switching between variants.

I'll take a look there and see if I catch anything relevant.

Thanks,
Ohad.


quoted text
>
> - Dave
>
>
>
--
unsubscribe notice
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/