* Peter Chubb <peterc@gelato.unsw.edu.au> wrote: > I suggest reversing the sense of the macros, and having > read_can_lock() and write_can_lock() > > Meaning: > read_can_lock() --- a read_lock() would have succeeded > write_can_lock() --- a write_lock() would have succeeded. i solved the problem differently in my patch sent to lkml today: i introduced read_trylock_test()/etc. variants which mirror the semantics of the trylock primitives and solve the needs of the PREEMPT branch within kernel/spinlock.c. Ingo - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ia64" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.htmlReceived on Thu Jan 20 08:05:34 2005
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 2005-08-02 09:20:34 EST