Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Mon, 18 Dec 2000 18:25:32 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Mon, 18 Dec 2000 18:25:22 -0500 Received: from ns-inetext.inet.com ([199.171.211.140]:43214 "EHLO ns-inetext.inet.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Mon, 18 Dec 2000 18:25:11 -0500 Message-ID: <3A3E95B3.19E51EEE@inet.com> Date: Mon, 18 Dec 2000 16:54:43 -0600 From: Eli Carter Organization: Inet Technologies, Inc. X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.5-15 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: generic sleeping locks? 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 Allow me to display my ignorance a moment. Are there blocking lock primitives already defined somewhere in the kernel? It just seems that while( lockvar ) sleep_on( &lockwaitq ); along with its various permutations would be commonly used and worthy of being made into a generic sleep lock. A few blind greps through the source didn't find anything that caught my eye. If there aren't, would a patch to add them be of interest to anyone? Input on design details welcome. TIA, Eli --------------------. "To the systems programmer, users and applications Eli Carter | serve only to provide a test load." eli.carter@inet.com `---------------------------------- (random fortune) - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/