Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S262378AbTESKpS (ORCPT ); Mon, 19 May 2003 06:45:18 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S262379AbTESKpS (ORCPT ); Mon, 19 May 2003 06:45:18 -0400 Received: from [213.171.53.133] ([213.171.53.133]:39689 "EHLO gulipin.miee.ru") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S262378AbTESKpR (ORCPT ); Mon, 19 May 2003 06:45:17 -0400 Date: Mon, 19 May 2003 13:59:48 +0400 From: Samium Gromoff To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: recursive spinlock. Shoot. Message-Id: <20030519135948.0f0be20f.deepfire@ibe.miee.ru> X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.8.11 (GTK+ 1.2.10; i386-debian-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 679 Lines: 15 Not that my opinion matters much, but my feeling is that such measures are very much of the bandaid taste, the ones which in the end piled one on another end up obscuring the very problems in the code. In short, it`ll probably make _filling_in_ the code easier, but the effect is that it will shift the balance towards crap accumulation. To me, that is the damage of the kind which is very hard to undo. regards, Samium Gromoff - 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/