Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Mon, 17 Jun 2002 17:12:31 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Mon, 17 Jun 2002 17:12:30 -0400 Received: from gateway-1237.mvista.com ([12.44.186.158]:55536 "EHLO hermes.mvista.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Mon, 17 Jun 2002 17:12:29 -0400 Subject: Re: [patch] v2.5.22 - add wait queue function callback support From: Robert Love To: Bob Miller Cc: Dave Jones , Benjamin LaHaise , Linus Torvalds , Linux Kernel In-Reply-To: <20020617135744.A24347@doc.pdx.osdl.net> References: <20020617161434.D1457@redhat.com> <20020617222812.I758@suse.de> <20020617135744.A24347@doc.pdx.osdl.net> Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.0.7 Date: 17 Jun 2002 14:12:20 -0700 Message-Id: <1024348340.922.124.camel@sinai> Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1019 Lines: 25 On Mon, 2002-06-17 at 13:57, Bob Miller wrote: > It depends on what you mean by killed off. I submitted a patch to Linus back > at 2.5.3 to clean up the way the completion code called the wait queue > interface. This interface got added then. You picked up those changes at > that time (and still have them in your kernel tree) but the changes have > never made it into Linus' tree. > > So, Linus has never had the code to 'kill' and you've never dropped it > after picking it up. Work has gone in since this. During 2.5.20, Linus asked for and I submitted a patch to remove the whole wq_lock_t mess altogether. It was merged into 2.5.21. Subsequently, there is no wq_lock_t abstraction in current 2.5 kernels and code should use a standard spinlock. Robert Love - 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/