Oops yes you're right. It might be worth defining a separate function for that, but its your call. The patch is good as is.
Ethan (iPhone) On Aug 17, 2013, at 13:08, Ben Pfaff <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Aug 16, 2013 9:47 PM, "Ethan Jackson" <[email protected]> wrote: > > Personally I'd prefer we change ovs_mutex_init() to not take a mutex > > type as an argument and simply use the error checking mutex always. I > > think it's going to be a long time before we actually need to > > configure this on a per mutex basis, and I don't think we know what > > abstraction we'll need at that point today. > > Don't we need the ability to initialize a recursive mutex? It didn't occur to > me to drop the parameter but that's the only current reason to keep it. > > Thanks, > > Ben.
_______________________________________________ dev mailing list [email protected] http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
