From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Tue, 30 Jan 2001 11:52:34 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Tue, 30 Jan 2001 11:52:25 -0500 Received: from jump-isi.interactivesi.com ([207.8.4.2]:59385 "HELO dinero.interactivesi.com") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id ; Tue, 30 Jan 2001 11:52:04 -0500 Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 10:52:02 -0600 From: Timur Tabi To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <7085.980853087@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCE] Kernel Janitor's TODO list X-Mailer: The Polarbar Mailer; version=1.19a; build=73 Message-ID: X-AntiVirus: scanned for viruses by AMaViS 0.2.1 (http://amavis.org/) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org ** Reply to message from David Woodhouse on Tue, 30 Jan 2001 11:11:27 +0000 > Note that this is _precisely_ the reason I'm advocating the removal of > sleep_on(). When I was young and stupid (ok, "younger and stupider") I used > sleep_on() in my code. I pondered briefly the fact that I really couldn't > convince myself that it was safe, but because it was used in so many other > places, I decided I had to be missing something, and used it anyway. > > I was wrong. I was copying broken code. And now I want to remove all those > bad examples - for the benefit of those who are looking at them now and are > tempted to copy them. What is wrong with sleep_on()? -- Timur Tabi - ttabi@interactivesi.com Interactive Silicon - http://www.interactivesi.com When replying to a mailing-list message, please direct the reply to the mailing list only. Don't send another copy to me. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/