RE: ACPI locking

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Bob,
I agree that mutex vs semaphore is an optimization.

However (mutex or semaphore) vs spinlock is about correctness.

1. Linux needs to know if the lock being requested by ACPICA
   can be accessed at interrupt time.
2.  Linux needs to know if ACPICA might sleep when holding the lock.

I agree about making osl.c go away.
We've succeeded in doing this with the kmalloc()
interface, and I'm hopeful we can do so with the
locking interface also.  But to #define a request
in ACPICA to multiple types of native requests,
ACPICA must internally differentiate between the
different types of locks that it needs.

I'm talking about spinlock vs. mutex vs. semaphore here.
The global lock and the routine to handle ASL Acquire()
are special cases.

-Len
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

[Index of Archives]     [Linux IBM ACPI]     [Linux Power Management]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux Laptop]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Share Photos]     [Security]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Samba]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Device Mapper]     [Linux Resources]

  Powered by Linux