On Mon, 25 Oct 2010, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > On Mon, 25 Oct 2010, Nick Piggin wrote: > > Although a sane locking macro and structure like I had, would perfectly > > allow you to switch locks in a single place just the same. > > And a locking macro/structure is better in self documenting than a > helper function which was proposed by Christoph? Independently of what data structure you folks agree on, we really do _NOT_ want to have open coded bit_spin_*lock() anywhere in the code. As I said before, aside of RT it's a basic requirement to switch bit spinlocks to real ones for lockdep debugging. Thanks, tglx -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
