From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Subject: RE: down_spin() implementation Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2008 14:16:55 -0700 Message-ID: <1FE6DD409037234FAB833C420AA843ECF237C0@orsmsx424.amr.corp.intel.com> In-reply-to: <20080328124517.GQ16721@parisc-linux.org> References: <1FE6DD409037234FAB833C420AA843ECE9DF60@orsmsx424.amr.corp.intel.com> <1FE6DD409037234FAB833C420AA843ECE9EB1C@orsmsx424.amr.corp.intel.com> <20080327141508.GL16721@parisc-linux.org> <200803281101.25037.nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au> <20080328124517.GQ16721@parisc-linux.org> From: "Luck, Tony" Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Matthew Wilcox , Nick Piggin Cc: Stephen Rothwell , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-ID: > So it makes little sense to add this to semaphores. Better to introduce > a spinaphore, as you say. > struct { > atomic_t cur; > int max; > } ss_t; Could this API sneak into the bottom of one or the other of linux/include/{spinlock,semaphore}.h ... or should it get its own spinaphore.h file? Or should I follow Alan's earlier advice and keep this as an ia64 only thing (since I'll be the only user). -Tony -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org