From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
To: Daniel Walker <dwalker@codeaurora.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v0] add nano semaphore in kernel
Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2010 12:47:27 +0100
User-Agent: KMail/1.13.5 (Linux/2.6.37-rc6-next-20101220+; KDE/4.5.1; x86_64; ; )
Cc: Hillf Danton <dhillf@gmail.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
References: <AANLkTim0Xmsnzz5yMLAx_+w-c7sSSReu0SKMAmjpbS+1@mail.gmail.com> <201012272215.52642.arnd@arndb.de> <1293551490.24601.10.camel@m0nster>
In-Reply-To: <1293551490.24601.10.camel@m0nster>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain;
  charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <201012291247.27663.arnd@arndb.de>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1183
Lines: 30

On Tuesday 28 December 2010 16:51:30 Daniel Walker wrote:
> We for sure don't want new semaphores, or new semaphore usage in the
> kernel ..

Yes. I once even tried unifying the semaphore and rwsem implementation,
but gave up on that for a number of reasons.

> It should also be noted that the rtmutex (kernel/rtmutex.c) already has
> this capability. Although I don't think you can use an rtmutex from
> inside the kernel.

I wasn't aware we had already grown another one ;-)

AFAICT, you can only use it inside of the kernel, but it's very
specific and I wouldn't recommend using it unless a regular mutex
cannot be used for some reason. The only user besides the futex
code seems to be the i2c layer at this moment.

> If you really want this you should look into the rtmutex, and the
> regular mutex API's .

If Hillf relies on counting semaphores, that won't work, but very
few such users exist in code outside of textbooks.

	Arnd
--
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/