The usage of this "mutex" is non obvious and probably a completion in
some places. Make it a semaphore.
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <[email protected]>
Cc: Martin Schwidefsky <[email protected]>
---
drivers/s390/cio/crw.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
Index: linux-2.6-tip/drivers/s390/cio/crw.c
===================================================================
--- linux-2.6-tip.orig/drivers/s390/cio/crw.c
+++ linux-2.6-tip/drivers/s390/cio/crw.c
@@ -137,7 +137,7 @@ void crw_handle_channel_report(void)
*/
static int __init crw_init_semaphore(void)
{
- init_MUTEX_LOCKED(&crw_semaphore);
+ semaphore_init_locked(&crw_semaphore);
return 0;
}
pure_initcall(crw_init_semaphore);
On Sun, 26 Jul 2009 08:18:10 -0000
Thomas Gleixner <[email protected]> wrote:
> The usage of this "mutex" is non obvious and probably a completion in
> some places. Make it a semaphore.
>
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <[email protected]>
> Cc: Martin Schwidefsky <[email protected]>
> ---
> drivers/s390/cio/crw.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> Index: linux-2.6-tip/drivers/s390/cio/crw.c
> ===================================================================
> --- linux-2.6-tip.orig/drivers/s390/cio/crw.c
> +++ linux-2.6-tip/drivers/s390/cio/crw.c
> @@ -137,7 +137,7 @@ void crw_handle_channel_report(void)
> */
> static int __init crw_init_semaphore(void)
> {
> - init_MUTEX_LOCKED(&crw_semaphore);
> + semaphore_init_locked(&crw_semaphore);
> return 0;
> }
> pure_initcall(crw_init_semaphore);
>
>
The crw_semaphore is a real semaphore and the init_MUTEX_LOCKED is
indeed confusing. semaphore_init_locked is a more sensible name even if
the end result is in both cases just a sema_init(sem, 0). Anyway, fine
with me:
Acked-By: Martin Schwidefsky <[email protected]>
--
blue skies,
Martin.
"Reality continues to ruin my life." - Calvin.