-mm recently added a write_trylock_irqsave() implementation. We can do
a better implementation than that, so we're able to:
1. Have a slightly faster implementation
2. Have a far lesser invasive patch (add fewer lines, touch fewer files)
3. Be consistent in style with the spin_trylock_irqsave() of mainline and -mm
(http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/5/9/575)
> For the sake of completeness of the API, we could also add a
> read_trylock_irqsave, but I'd be against the _irq variants (or should
> we call them hazards) that don't save / restore.
[PATCH -mm 1/2] Kills the previous implementation of write_trylock_irqsave()
[PATCH -mm 2/2] Reintroduces the new implementation of write_trylock_irqsave()
Signed-off-by: Satyam Sharma <[email protected]>