Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 31 Jan 1999 01:23:34 +0100 (CET) | From | Andrea Arcangeli <> | Subject | Re: [patch] down_norecurse(), down_interruptible_norecurse(), up_norecurse() |
| |
On Sat, 30 Jan 1999, Tim Waugh wrote:
> MUTEX_NORECURSE probably isn't for a mutex -- it's semaphores that don't > want recursion. It would be nicer to have something like > SEMAPHORE(initval). If I thought long enough about it, I'm fairly sure I > could come up with a situation where you'd want to initialise a semaphore > to >1.
Ok. I think the MUTEX word was to tell that you wanted a semaphore initialized to 1 (as a mutex unlocked), but agreed, SEMAPHORE(x) looks a better name for the norecursive semaphore initializer.
Andrea Arcangeli
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |