Linux-kernel mailing list archive 2000-26,: Re: owner field in `struct fs'

# Re: owner field in `struct fs'

Roman Zippel (zippel@fh-brandenburg.de)
Tue, 27 Jun 2000 10:51:49 +0200 (MET DST)

- Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
- Next message: Mike A. Harris: "Re: IDE drive cable oddity..."
- Previous message: Ben Ford: "Re: IDE drive cable oddity..."

Hi,

> > While we're at it - can we get rid of MOD_INC_USE_COUNT and
> > __MOD_INC_USE_COUNT altogether to force people to be aware of the need for
> > try_inc_mod_count and checking its return value? First thing in 2.5 along
> > with removing sleep_on() ?
>
> Yes. Moreover, I hope that we can effectively get rid of them before 2.5.
> Which is one of the reasons why I don't like keeping them all over the
> place, especially if it involves schedule()-based solutions.

What about the idea using a rw semaphore? It's seems to me the most
elegant and easiest solution for now. Cleaning up the module
management is a nice idea, but IMHO not 2.4 thing, let's do it right in
2.5 and not now in a hurry, when we want to get 2.4 stable.

bye, Roman

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

- Next message: Mike A. Harris: "Re: IDE drive cable oddity..."
- Previous message: Ben Ford: "Re: IDE drive cable oddity..."