On Sun, 4 Sep 2011 20:52:42 -0700
Ben Widawsky b...@bwidawsk.net wrote:
While I think the previous code is correct, it was hard to follow and
hard to debug. Since we already have a ring abstraction, might as well
use it to handle the semaphore updates and compares.
I don't expect this code
While I think the previous code is correct, it was hard to follow and
hard to debug. Since we already have a ring abstraction, might as well
use it to handle the semaphore updates and compares.
I don't expect this code to make semaphores better or worse, but you
never know...
Cc: Chris Wilson
On Fri, 02 Sep 2011 12:10:28 -0700
Eric Anholt e...@anholt.net wrote:
On Thu, 1 Sep 2011 20:55:35 -0700, Ben Widawsky b...@bwidawsk.net
wrote:
While I think the previous code is correct, it was hard to follow
and hard to debug. Since we already have a ring abstraction, might
as well use
On Sat, 3 Sep 2011 13:09:47 -0700, Ben Widawsky b...@bwidawsk.net wrote:
Keith, worth cleaning this one up?
Yes, I think so. If nothing else, we'll have more people who actually
understand how the code is supposed to work, which should help with
future maintenance.
--
keith.pack...@intel.com
On Thu, 1 Sep 2011 20:55:35 -0700, Ben Widawsky b...@bwidawsk.net wrote:
While I think the previous code is correct, it was hard to follow and
hard to debug. Since we already have a ring abstraction, might as well
use it to handle the semaphore updates and compares.
I don't expect this code
On Fri, Sep 02, 2011 at 09:54:32AM +0100, Chris Wilson wrote:
On Thu, 1 Sep 2011 20:55:35 -0700, Ben Widawsky b...@bwidawsk.net wrote:
While I think the previous code is correct, it was hard to follow and
hard to debug. Since we already have a ring abstraction, might as well
use it to
On Thu, 1 Sep 2011 20:55:35 -0700, Ben Widawsky b...@bwidawsk.net wrote:
While I think the previous code is correct, it was hard to follow and
hard to debug. Since we already have a ring abstraction, might as well
use it to handle the semaphore updates and compares.
I don't expect this code
While I think the previous code is correct, it was hard to follow and
hard to debug. Since we already have a ring abstraction, might as well
use it to handle the semaphore updates and compares.
I don't expect this code to make semaphores better or worse, but you
never know...
Cc: Andrew