On Sat, Nov 27, 2010 at 3:24 AM, David Brownell <[email protected]> wrote: > Your intent "generic" is fine, but you've not achieved it and thus I > think you shouldn't imply that you have. Dropping the word "generic" > should suffice; it _is_ a framework, and maybe the next person working > with hardware spinlocks can finish generalizing (and add use cases).
Sure, I can drop the word "generic". > Haven't looked at RT in a long time. Just look at the current RT > patchset to see if it still has several spinlock variants. ISTR the > "raw" spinlock stuff came from there not long ago. Much compile-time > magic was involved in switching between variants. I'll take a look there and see if I catch anything relevant. Thanks, Ohad. > > - Dave > > > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
