On Fri, 27 Apr 2007 10:43:22 +0200 Matthias Kaehlcke <[email protected]> wrote:
> the Power Management code uses semaphores as mutexes. use the mutex
> API instead of the (binary) semaphores
I know it's a little thing, but given a choice between
a) changelogs which use capital letters and fullstops and
b) changelogs which do not,
I think a) gives a better result.
I note that none of these patches added a #include <linux/mutex.h>. Each C
file which uses mutexes should do that, rather than relying upon accidental
nested includes. I hope you're checking for that.
El Thu, May 03, 2007 at 10:54:32PM -0700 Andrew Morton ha dit:
> On Fri, 27 Apr 2007 10:43:22 +0200 Matthias Kaehlcke <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > the Power Management code uses semaphores as mutexes. use the mutex
> > API instead of the (binary) semaphores
>
> I know it's a little thing, but given a choice between
>
> a) changelogs which use capital letters and fullstops and
>
> b) changelogs which do not,
>
> I think a) gives a better result.
thanks for your suggestion, i'll take it into account for future patches
> I note that none of these patches added a #include <linux/mutex.h>. Each C
> file which uses mutexes should do that, rather than relying upon accidental
> nested includes. I hope you're checking for that.
initially i added the include line (i think at least one patch still
contains it), but then i realized that in most cases the original code
doesn't include semaphore.h and i (mis-)interpreted that it should be
handled the same way (relying upon nested includes) for mutexes.
do you want me to send you a version of the patches containing the
include?
regards
--
Matthias Kaehlcke
Linux Application Developer
Barcelona
The assumption that what currently exists must necessarily
exist is the acid that corrodes all visionary thinking
.''`.
using free software / Debian GNU/Linux | http://debian.org : :' :
`. `'`
gpg --keyserver pgp.mit.edu --recv-keys 47D8E5D4 `-
On Fri, 4 May 2007 09:08:40 +0200 Matthias Kaehlcke <[email protected]> wrote:
> > I note that none of these patches added a #include <linux/mutex.h>. Each C
> > file which uses mutexes should do that, rather than relying upon accidental
> > nested includes. I hope you're checking for that.
>
> initially i added the include line (i think at least one patch still
> contains it), but then i realized that in most cases the original code
> doesn't include semaphore.h and i (mis-)interpreted that it should be
> handled the same way (relying upon nested includes) for mutexes.
>
> do you want me to send you a version of the patches containing the
> include?
erm, is OK, I'll make the changes.