Re: [PATCH 1/19] MUTEX: Introduce simple mutex implementation

[David Howells]

Paul Jackson <pj@xxxxxxx> wrote:

> The sed/perl script to make the textual change should be practical.
> Indeed, I would claim that the initial big patch -should- be done
> that way.  Keep refining a sed script until manual inspection and
> trial builds of all arch's, allconfig, show that it seems to be right.
> Each time you find an error doing this, don't manually edit the
> kernel source; rather refine the script and try applying it again.

Actually, you may have a point.

If the order of patches is:

 (1) Create new mutex as struct mutex/up_mutex/down_mutex, say.

 (2) Make counting semaphore implementation struct semaphore/up_sem/down_sem.

 (3) Convert uses of semaphores that should be completions into completions.

 (4) Convert uses of semaphores that should be counting semaphores to use
     up_sem/down_sem.

 (5) Mass convert by script all the remaining ups and downs into up_mutex and
     down_mutex.

 (6) Make wrappers for up/down that map to counting semaphores with the
     deprecation attribute set.

That might work, and would be a lot easier; except for the humongous patch
generated at step 5 - which could be regenerated by script. I think I can make
a simple perl script to do that.

Note that I am assuming above that down == down/down_trylock/down_interruptible
for clarity.

David
-
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/