* Ingo Molnar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Tue, Dec 13, 2005 at 08:54:41AM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > > - i did not touch the 'struct semaphore' namespace, but introduced a
> > > 'struct compat_semaphore'.
> >
> > Because it's totally braindead. Your compat_semaphore is a real
> > semaphore and your semaphore is a mutex. So name them as such.
>
> well, i had the choice between a 30K patch, a 300K patch and a 3000K
> patch. I went for the 30K patch ;-)
in that sense i'm all for going for the 300K patch, which is roughly the
direction David is heading into: rename to 'struct mutex' but keep the
down/up APIs, and introduce sem_down()/sem_up()/ for the cases that need
full semaphores.
i dont think the 3000K patch (full API rename, introduction of
mutex_down()/mutex_up()) is realistic.
Ingo
