From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932593AbVLMJTk (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Dec 2005 04:19:40 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932592AbVLMJTk (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Dec 2005 04:19:40 -0500 Received: from pentafluge.infradead.org ([213.146.154.40]:32924 "EHLO pentafluge.infradead.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932591AbVLMJTj (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Dec 2005 04:19:39 -0500 Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/19] MUTEX: Introduce simple mutex implementation From: Arjan van de Ven To: Ingo Molnar Cc: Andrew Morton , David Howells , torvalds@osdl.org, hch@infradead.org, matthew@wil.cx, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <20051213090349.GE10088@elte.hu> References: <20051212161944.3185a3f9.akpm@osdl.org> <20051213075441.GB6765@elte.hu> <1134460804.2866.17.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> <20051213090349.GE10088@elte.hu> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2005 10:19:30 +0100 Message-Id: <1134465570.7362.0.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.2.3 (2.2.3-2.fc4) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 1.8 (+) X-Spam-Report: SpamAssassin version 3.0.4 on pentafluge.infradead.org summary: Content analysis details: (1.8 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- 0.1 RCVD_IN_SORBS_DUL RBL: SORBS: sent directly from dynamic IP address [213.93.14.173 listed in dnsbl.sorbs.net] 1.7 RCVD_IN_NJABL_DUL RBL: NJABL: dialup sender did non-local SMTP [213.93.14.173 listed in combined.njabl.org] X-SRS-Rewrite: SMTP reverse-path rewritten from by pentafluge.infradead.org See http://www.infradead.org/rpr.html Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 2005-12-13 at 10:03 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote: > * Arjan van de Ven wrote: > > > > even better than that, why not use the solution that we've implemented > > > for the -rt patchset, more than a year ago? > > > > > > the solution i took was this: > > > > > > - i did not touch the 'struct semaphore' namespace, but introduced a > > > 'struct compat_semaphore'. > > > > which I think is wrong. THis naming sucks. Sure doing a full sed on > > the tree is not pretty but it's also not THAT painful. And the pain of > > wrong names is something the kernel needs to carry around for years. > > well, i'm all for renaming struct semaphore to struct mutex, but dont > the same arguments apply as to 'struct timer_list'? don't think so; this is not a "lets do them one by one over the year", this is a "do them all right now at once" move.