* Kevin Hilman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > What I've done for now is to use sema_init_nocheck() to disable the > checking in the case of a counting semaphore, but I remember seeing > discussion in an earlier thread about creating a separate counting > semaphore type. Is this still planned?
the nocheck variant is the counting semaphore in essence. I removed the counting semaphore implementation because it caused more problems than it solved - but it can be reintroduced later. > [*] For example, an open semaphore being down'ed and thus acquired and > the same thread doing a down() again before another thread has a > chance to up() the semaphore. yeah, these are cases where the code is better off using completions anyway. Thomas Gleixner had a good bunch of patches to convers such semaphore use to completions - the most necessary ones are in -RT, and i hope he'll submit the whole bunch upstream after 2.6.11 is out :-) Ingo - 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/