Re: Define __raw_read_lock etc for uniprocessor builds

[Ingo Molnar]

* Arjan van de Ven <arjan@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> > 2) The _raw versions are intended to be used in places where it is
> > known that preemption is already disabled, so that the overhead of
> > re-disabling/enabling it can be avoided.
> 
> that's not true either. If it was, then the name would have been 
> different.

indeed. The __raw versions are _not_ to be used by anything else but the 
generic spinlock code. (There's one other stray use by PARISC, but that 
is justified.)

[ the -rt tree makes use of 'raw_' spinlocks, but they are totally
  different things. ]

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