Re: [PATCH] use spinlock instead of binary mutex in idt77252 driver

2007-04-23 Thread Eddie C. Dost
Hi, Please note that the semaphore is used to lock the idt77252 config tables among multiple users including atmsigd even on single processor machines. Does this work with mutexes? Best regards, Eddie On Mon, Apr 23, 2007 at 08:55:20AM +0200, Matthias Kaehlcke wrote: > El Sun, Apr 22, 2007 at

Re: [PATCH] use spinlock instead of binary mutex in idt77252 driver

2007-04-23 Thread Eddie C. Dost
23, 2007 at 09:16:08AM +0200 Eddie C. Dost ha dit: > > > Please note that the semaphore is used to lock the idt77252 config > > tables among multiple users including atmsigd even on single processor > > machines. Does this work with mutexes? > > afaik mutexes hav

Re: [PATCH] use spinlock instead of binary mutex in idt77252 driver

2007-04-23 Thread Eddie C. Dost
Hi, Please note that the semaphore is used to lock the idt77252 config tables among multiple users including atmsigd even on single processor machines. Does this work with mutexes? Best regards, Eddie On Mon, Apr 23, 2007 at 08:55:20AM +0200, Matthias Kaehlcke wrote: El Sun, Apr 22, 2007 at

Re: [PATCH] use spinlock instead of binary mutex in idt77252 driver

2007-04-23 Thread Eddie C. Dost
, 2007 at 09:16:08AM +0200 Eddie C. Dost ha dit: Please note that the semaphore is used to lock the idt77252 config tables among multiple users including atmsigd even on single processor machines. Does this work with mutexes? afaik mutexes have the same behaviour as binary semaphores