* Uwe Hermann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [070706 02:05]:
> Various spinlock-related cleanups:
>
> - Revert back to spinlock_t (instead of struct spinlock). This is fine
> in this special case, as the contents of spinlock_t are not meant to
> ever be accessed directly (only by "accessor" functions).
NACK.
Why would that be required? The code in svn needs no fixing. Let's not
invent typedefs without any need for them
> - Drop the spin_lock_string and spin_unlock_string macros, they're pretty
> useless as they're only used in a single place and a macro doesn't make
> this code any more readable, IMO.
NACK.
They are not useless at all as they are _the_ (one and only) spinlock
implementation on x86. The "only single place" is the declaration of the
x86 specific spin_lock and spin_unlock functions.
--
coresystems GmbH • Brahmsstr. 16 • D-79104 Freiburg i. Br.
Tel.: +49 761 7668825 • Fax: +49 761 7664613
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] • http://www.coresystems.de/
Registergericht: Amtsgericht Freiburg • HRB 7656
Geschäftsführer: Stefan Reinauer • Ust-IdNr.: DE245674866
--
linuxbios mailing list
linuxbios@linuxbios.org
http://www.linuxbios.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
