> +DEFINE_MUTEX(qib_mutex); /* general driver use */
Rather than having this ill-defined mutex that I think is going to make it hard to understand the locking and get the lock ordering right, would it be better to have well-defined locking rules? AFAICT this mutex is used in only two places, qib_diag.c and qib_file_op.c. Are those two uses protecting the same thing? Or could we have two static mutexes, one in each file, that protects what each file needs protected? -- Roland Dreier <rola...@cisco.com> || For corporate legal information go to: http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/index.html -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rdma" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
