On Monday, November 21, 2016 7:57:53 AM CET Linus Torvalds wrote: > Don't do this. > > Never ever do your own locking primitives. You will get the memory ordering > wrong. And even if you get it right, why do it? > > If you want to get rid of semaphores, and replace them with a mutex, that's > OK. But don't replace them with something more complex like an open coded > waiting model. I think a mutex would't work here, since fops->open() and fops->close() are not called from the same context and lockdep will complain about that. Version of the series had replaced the semaphore with a completion here, which worked correctly, but one reviewer suggested using the wait_event() instead since it's confusing to have a completion starting out in 'completed' state. Arnd -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rdma" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
