On Tue, 2005-12-13 at 16:10 +0000, Alan Cox wrote: > On Maw, 2005-12-13 at 15:39 +0000, David Howells wrote: > > (3) Some people want mutexes to be: > > > > (a) only releasable in the same context as they were taken > > > > (b) not accessible in interrupt context, or that (a) applies here also > > > > (c) not initialisable to the locked state > > > > But this means that the current usages all have to be carefully > > audited, > > and sometimes that unobvious. > > Only if you insist on replacing them immediately. If you submit a > *small* patch which just adds the new mutexes then a series of small > patches can gradually convert code where mutexes are better.
this unfortunately is not very realistic in practice...
