Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261361AbVC0SdE (ORCPT ); Sun, 27 Mar 2005 13:33:04 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261368AbVC0SdE (ORCPT ); Sun, 27 Mar 2005 13:33:04 -0500 Received: from 71-33-33-84.albq.qwest.net ([71.33.33.84]:21953 "EHLO montezuma.fsmlabs.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261361AbVC0SdA (ORCPT ); Sun, 27 Mar 2005 13:33:00 -0500 Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2005 11:34:50 -0700 (MST) From: Zwane Mwaikambo To: Jesper Juhl cc: linux-kernel , Ingo Molnar , Robert Love Subject: Re: [RFC] spinlock_t & rwlock_t break_lock member initialization (patch seeking comments included) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 667 Lines: 19 On Sun, 27 Mar 2005, Jesper Juhl wrote: > I've now been running kernels (both PREEMPT, SMP, both and without both) > with the patch below applied for a few days and I see no ill effects. I'm > still interrested in comments about wether or not something like this > makes sense and is acceptable ? The concept seems fine to me, although i think you should be using named initialisers instead. Thanks Jesper, Zwane - 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/