On Mon, 31 Jul 2017, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> But I really do not agree with your reasoning about easier to understand
> and maintain. I have the dubious pleasure to stare into that code on a
> regular base. PI and non PI share a lot of code and it's really not helping
> to have two separate
On Mon, 31 Jul 2017, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> But I really do not agree with your reasoning about easier to understand
> and maintain. I have the dubious pleasure to stare into that code on a
> regular base. PI and non PI share a lot of code and it's really not helping
> to have two separate
On Sat, 29 Jul 2017, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> Split out the priority inheritance support to a file of its own
> to make futex.c much smaller, easier to understand and, hopefully,
> to maintain. This also makes it easy to preserve basic futex support
> and compile out the PI support when RT mutexes
On Sat, 29 Jul 2017, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> Split out the priority inheritance support to a file of its own
> to make futex.c much smaller, easier to understand and, hopefully,
> to maintain. This also makes it easy to preserve basic futex support
> and compile out the PI support when RT mutexes
Split out the priority inheritance support to a file of its own
to make futex.c much smaller, easier to understand and, hopefully,
to maintain. This also makes it easy to preserve basic futex support
and compile out the PI support when RT mutexes are not available.
Signed-off-by: Nicolas Pitre
Split out the priority inheritance support to a file of its own
to make futex.c much smaller, easier to understand and, hopefully,
to maintain. This also makes it easy to preserve basic futex support
and compile out the PI support when RT mutexes are not available.
Signed-off-by: Nicolas Pitre
6 matches
Mail list logo
