From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755532Ab0IHO7m (ORCPT ); Wed, 8 Sep 2010 10:59:42 -0400 Received: from casper.infradead.org ([85.118.1.10]:36888 "EHLO casper.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750849Ab0IHO7k convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Wed, 8 Sep 2010 10:59:40 -0400 Subject: Re: [GIT pull] Preparatory patch for semaphore cleanup From: Peter Zijlstra To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Thomas Gleixner , Andrew Morton , LKML , Ingo Molnar In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Date: Wed, 08 Sep 2010 16:59:21 +0200 Message-ID: <1283957961.23762.28.camel@laptop> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.28.3 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 2010-09-08 at 07:54 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 6:11 AM, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > > > This patch just provides the DEFINE_SEMAPHORE macro which is required > > for the various subsystem cleanups I sent out, so we can finally get > > rid of init_MUTEX[_LOCKED] in 2.6.37. > > Why is it called DEFINE_SEMAPHORE(), when two lines later the we have > DECLARE_MUTEX()? > > IOW, the whole DEFINE vs DECLARE thing seems confused. I'm not saying > one is better than the other (maybe "define" is), but the mixing of > names is worse than either, I feel.. The rest of the series, that Thomas didn't include in this pull, removes all the DECLARE_MUTEX() users. So its temporary awkward-ness.