Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1750925AbVLGMZ7 (ORCPT ); Wed, 7 Dec 2005 07:25:59 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1750922AbVLGMZ7 (ORCPT ); Wed, 7 Dec 2005 07:25:59 -0500 Received: from perninha.conectiva.com.br ([200.140.247.100]:6124 "EHLO perninha.conectiva.com.br") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750791AbVLGMZ6 (ORCPT ); Wed, 7 Dec 2005 07:25:58 -0500 Date: Wed, 7 Dec 2005 10:25:40 -0200 From: Luiz Fernando Capitulino To: Oliver Neukum Cc: linux-usb-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, zaitcev@redhat.com, gregkh@suse.de, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, ehabkost@mandriva.com Subject: Re: [linux-usb-devel] Re: [PATCH 00/10] usb-serial: Switches from spin lock to atomic_t. Message-Id: <20051207102540.792ee35c.lcapitulino@mandriva.com.br> In-Reply-To: <200512062336.47855.oliver@neukum.org> References: <20051206095610.29def5e7.lcapitulino@mandriva.com.br> <20051206130207.7658636e.zaitcev@redhat.com> <20051206191845.6f4827b3.lcapitulino@mandriva.com.br> <200512062336.47855.oliver@neukum.org> Organization: Mandriva X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 1.0.5 (GTK+ 1.2.10; i586-mandriva-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: 1612 Lines: 45 On Tue, 6 Dec 2005 23:36:47 +0100 Oliver Neukum wrote: | Am Dienstag, 6. Dezember 2005 22:18 schrieb Luiz Fernando Capitulino: | > | > Hi Pete, | > | > On Tue, 6 Dec 2005 13:02:07 -0800 | > Pete Zaitcev wrote: | > | > | On Tue, 6 Dec 2005 18:14:49 -0200, Luiz Fernando Capitulino wrote: | > | | > | > The spinlock makes the code less clear, error prone, and we already a | > | > semaphore in the struct usb_serial_port. | > | > | > | > The spinlocks _seems_ useless to me. | > | | > | Dude, semaphores are not compatible with interrupts. Surely you | > | understand that? | > | > Sure thing man, take a look at this thread: | > | > http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-kernel&m=113216151918308&w=2 | > | > My comment 'we already have a semaphore in struct usb_serial_port' | > was about what we've discussed in that thread, where question like | > 'why should we have yet another lock here?' have been made. | > | > And *not* 'let's use the semaphore instead'. | > | > If _speed_ does not make difference, the spinlock seems useless, | > because we could use atomic_t instead. | | You can atomically set _one_ value using atomic_t. A spinlock allows | that and other more complex schemes. We only need to set 'write_urb_busy', nothing more. -- Luiz Fernando N. Capitulino - 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/