El Thu, Dec 06, 2007 at 09:12:05PM +0100 Remy Bohmer ha dit:
> Which do you have exactly on your list? (good to know, it prevents
> double work...)
it isn't really an elaborated list, until now i greped for certain
semaphore usages, had a look at the code and converted it if
necessary. at the mom
On Thu, 2007-12-06 at 19:30 -0400, Kevin Winchester wrote:
> Daniel Walker wrote:
> > On Thu, 2007-12-06 at 11:23 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >> * Daniel Walker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>
> >>> The port_mutex is actually a semaphore, so easily converted to a
> >>> struct mutex.
> >>>
> >>> Si
Daniel Walker wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-12-06 at 11:23 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>> * Daniel Walker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>> The port_mutex is actually a semaphore, so easily converted to a
>>> struct mutex.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Daniel Walker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> Acked-by: Ingo Molnar <[E
* Daniel Walker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > cool. How far away are we from being able to remove all the
> > semaphore code? :-)
>
> I wish my 7 patches made a dent, but it's hasn't done much. ;(
it's a beginning.
> I would guess at least a week just to mop up the relatively easy
> ones..
Hello Daniel,
> I looked at the console_sem , but i was going to leave that as last..
>
> The problem with the console_sem is that it can get locked from
> interrupt context, which is discouraged with mutex types.. I think it
> will be complicated to convert..
At first it looked simple, but after
On Thu, 2007-12-06 at 21:12 +0100, Remy Bohmer wrote:
> Hello Matthias,
>
> Which do you have exactly on your list? (good to know, it prevents
> double work...)
Here's my list so far (in no particular order).. Most aren't tested
fully yet.. I'll try to post them someplace eventually (later today
On Thu, 2007-12-06 at 21:01 +0100, Remy Bohmer wrote:
> Daniel,
>
> FYI: I am working on the conversion of the 2 sem->mutex in kernel/printk.c
I looked at the console_sem , but i was going to leave that as last..
The problem with the console_sem is that it can get locked from
interrupt context,
Hello Matthias,
Which do you have exactly on your list? (good to know, it prevents
double work...)
Remy
2007/12/6, Matthias Kaehlcke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> El Thu, Dec 06, 2007 at 08:34:06AM -0800 Daniel Walker ha dit:
>
> > On Thu, 2007-12-06 at 11:23 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > > * Daniel Wa
El Thu, Dec 06, 2007 at 08:34:06AM -0800 Daniel Walker ha dit:
> On Thu, 2007-12-06 at 11:23 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > * Daniel Walker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > The port_mutex is actually a semaphore, so easily converted to a
> > > struct mutex.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Daniel
Daniel,
FYI: I am working on the conversion of the 2 sem->mutex in kernel/printk.c
Remy
2007/12/6, Daniel Walker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On Thu, 2007-12-06 at 11:23 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > * Daniel Walker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > The port_mutex is actually a semaphore, so easily
On Thu, 2007-12-06 at 11:23 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Daniel Walker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > The port_mutex is actually a semaphore, so easily converted to a
> > struct mutex.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Daniel Walker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> Acked-by: Ingo Molnar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>
* Daniel Walker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The port_mutex is actually a semaphore, so easily converted to a
> struct mutex.
>
> Signed-off-by: Daniel Walker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Acked-by: Ingo Molnar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
cool. How far away are we from being able to remove all the semaphore
c
The port_mutex is actually a semaphore, so easily converted to
a struct mutex.
Signed-off-by: Daniel Walker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
drivers/char/lp.c | 11 ++-
include/linux/lp.h |2 +-
2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
Index: linux-2.6.23/drivers/char/lp.c
===
13 matches
Mail list logo
