Re: [GIT pull] Preparatory patch for semaphore cleanup

[Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>]

* Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> wrote:

> On Wed, 2010-09-08 at 17:56 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > * Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> wrote:
> > 
> > > On Wed, 2010-09-08 at 07:54 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 6:11 AM, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> 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.
> > 
> > and DEFINE_MUTEX() is needed upstream so that we can spread those 
> 
> s/DEFINE_MUTEX/DEFINE_SEMAPHORE/

Heh, i was demonstrating Linus's point ;-)

Thanks,

	Ingo