Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH] Replace completions with semaphores | From | Peter Zijlstra <> | Date | Mon, 14 Apr 2008 19:54:33 +0200 |
| |
On Mon, 2008-04-14 at 19:46 +0200, Andi Kleen wrote: > Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> writes: > > > > Yeah, I would open code it. But this is indeed a sane usage of the > > counting semaphore because there is no priority inversion. > > But when you open code that, how is it different from just having > semaphores?
Because we can then eventually get rid of semaphores, so those people cannot mistakenly use them. Its just too easy to create prio inversion with them around.
| |