(can anyone comment on whether i'm thinking about this clearly?) as i read it, there is no need for *any* of the semaphore.h files to include "<linux/rwsem.h>" anymore, since R/W sems now have their own header file <linux/rwsem.h>. so i recently submitted a patch to delete all those inclusions from all semaphore.h files. IMHO, that's a fairly safe and reasonable change -- anyone who specifically wants a R/W semaphore should be including the appropriate header file for it and not be picking up that definition thru semaphore.h.
however, some of those semaphore.h files also include the macro definition: #define RW_LOCK_BIAS 0x01000000 that *also* strikes me as inappropriate content for generic semaphore.h files. in fact, there's a fascinating variety of header files that define that macro identically: $ grep -rl "#define RW_LOCK_BIAS" * include/asm-frv/semaphore.h include/asm-arm26/locks.h include/asm-m68knommu/semaphore.h include/asm-i386/rwlock.h include/asm-sh/spinlock_types.h include/asm-arm/locks.h include/asm-m32r/spinlock_types.h include/asm-m68k/semaphore.h include/asm-h8300/semaphore.h include/asm-x86_64/rwlock.h include/asm-cris/arch-v32/spinlock.h include/asm-cris/semaphore.h so, where is the proper place for that macro definition? semaphore.h? locks.h? rwlock.h? spinlock.h? spinlock-types.h? the fact that that macro is defined in such differing locations *can't* be a good thing. rday -- ======================================================================== Robert P. J. Day Linux Consulting, Training and Annoying Kernel Pedantry Waterloo, Ontario, CANADA http://fsdev.net/wiki/index.php?title=Main_Page ======================================================================== - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
