From: "Dave Young" <hidave.darkstar@gmail.com>
To: "Alan Stern" <stern@rowland.harvard.edu>
Cc: "Greg KH" <gregkh@suse.de>, "David Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
"Greg KH" <greg@kroah.com>,
peterz@infradead.org,
"Kernel development list" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"USB list" <linux-usb@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/12] Use mutex instead of semaphore in driver core
Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2008 09:00:58 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <a8e1da0801021700s7aab56d4gc4c68aa6db5efce@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44L0.0801021057020.4861-100000@iolanthe.rowland.org>
On Jan 3, 2008 12:08 AM, Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu> wrote:
> On Tue, 1 Jan 2008, Greg KH wrote:
>
> > For most cases, yes, I agree with this, but due to the lockdep issues
> > that occur here, and the whole mess with the suspend path and locking
> > the device tree, that has been hashed out many times in the past, I am
> > interested in trying to see if there is any real reason why this is
> > absolutely necessary to convert.
> >
> > If no one has noticed any issues in this area, I think the complexity
> > that will be involved in any such conversion will strongly outweigh any
> > simplicity that might be expected.
> >
> > I'm very open to potential patches to do this, just don't ignore the
> > issues that others have run into in the past when attempting this.
>
> There are two separate things to consider here. One is struct device
> and the other is struct class.
>
> We know that replacing semaphores with mutexes in struct device doesn't
> sit well with lockdep. However the replacement may work perfectly
> smoothly for struct class. It would be worthwhile for Dave Young to
> separate out just that part and try it.
>
Ok, let me try a new patch only for struct class.
Regards
dave
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-01-03 1:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-12-29 1:01 Dave Young
2007-12-29 1:29 ` Peter Zijlstra
2007-12-29 1:36 ` Dave Young
2007-12-29 1:40 ` Dave Young
2007-12-29 1:42 ` Peter Zijlstra
2007-12-29 1:52 ` Dave Young
2007-12-29 1:57 ` Peter Zijlstra
2007-12-29 2:03 ` Dave Young
2007-12-29 2:36 ` Dave Young
2007-12-29 4:42 ` Greg KH
2007-12-29 5:06 ` Dave Young
2007-12-29 7:07 ` Dave Young
2007-12-29 17:07 ` Greg KH
2008-01-02 0:54 ` Dave Young
2008-01-02 5:18 ` Greg KH
2008-01-02 5:25 ` David Miller
2008-01-02 7:00 ` Greg KH
2008-01-02 7:52 ` David Miller
2008-01-02 12:39 ` Jarek Poplawski
2008-01-02 13:12 ` Jarek Poplawski
2008-01-02 16:08 ` Alan Stern
2008-01-03 1:00 ` Dave Young [this message]
2008-01-02 5:37 ` Dave Young
2007-12-29 22:01 ` Alan Stern
2007-12-30 6:42 ` David Brownell
2007-12-30 12:13 ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-01-08 16:54 ` Jiri Kosina
2008-01-02 0:58 ` Dave Young
2008-01-02 16:06 ` Alan Stern
2008-01-05 9:30 ` Andrew Morton
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=a8e1da0801021700s7aab56d4gc4c68aa6db5efce@mail.gmail.com \
--to=hidave.darkstar@gmail.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=greg@kroah.com \
--cc=gregkh@suse.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-usb@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=stern@rowland.harvard.edu \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
Powered by JetHome