Re: [PATCH 1/1] Replace down_trylock() with down_try(), reverse return values.
- From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 5 May 2008 01:58:23 -0400
On Mon, May 05, 2008 at 01:56:35AM +0000, Rusty Russell wrote:
down_trylock() returns 1 on failure, 0 on success. This differs from
spin_trylock(), mutex_trylock() and common sense. Or as ocfs2 put it
"kernel 1, world 0".
Rename it to down_try() (which makes more sense anyway), and reverse
it. Fortunately there aren't a huge number of callers left.
I took the liberty of reversing the sense of usb_trylock_device()
without renaming it: it's only used in one place anyway.
Given that people are actively trying to kill struct semaphore I don't
think doing a big search and rename is a good idea right now.
(And I also really hate the name down_try, but when it goes away that's
rather void and we can spare the discussion)
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: [PATCH 1/1] Replace down_trylock() with down_try(), reverse return values.
- From: Rusty Russell
- Re: [PATCH 1/1] Replace down_trylock() with down_try(), reverse return values.
- References:
- [PATCH 1/1] Replace down_trylock() with down_try(), reverse return values.
- From: Rusty Russell
- [PATCH 1/1] Replace down_trylock() with down_try(), reverse return values.
- Prev by Date: Re: Linux 2.6.26-rc1
- Next by Date: Re: [PATCH 1/1] Replace down_trylock() with down_try(), reverse return values.
- Previous by thread: [PATCH 1/1] Replace down_trylock() with down_try(), reverse return values.
- Next by thread: Re: [PATCH 1/1] Replace down_trylock() with down_try(), reverse return values.
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading
