On Thursday 19 July 2007 17:22:38 Dmitry Torokhov wrote: > Hi Andi, > > On 7/19/07, Andi Kleen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > From: Thomas Gleixner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > Replace the pcspkr private PIT lock by the global PIT lock to serialize the > > PIT access all over the place. > > > > Like I said before I'd be more happy if spinlock was attached to a > platform device that pcspkr binds to so the arch code would control > wehther we use a private spinlock or a global one (I sent a patch to > that effect earlier).
Not sure that flexibility is needed. Why would an architecture ever want to have more than one lock for this? And we normally don't need sysdevs for locks, they seem to be quite unrelated. AFAIK sysdevs are just for suspend/resume, and even for that they seem to get obsoleted now. -Andi - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
