From ef5dc121d5a0bb1fa477c5395277259f07d318a3 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Randy Dunlap Date: Thu, 2 Sep 2010 15:48:16 -0700 Subject: mutex: Fix annotations to include it in kernel-locking docbook Fix kernel-doc notation in linux/mutex.h and kernel/mutex.c, then add these 2 files to the kernel-locking docbook as the Mutex API reference chapter. Add one API function to mutex-design.txt and correct a typo in that file. Signed-off-by: Randy Dunlap Cc: Rusty Russell LKML-Reference: <20100902154816.6cc2f9ad.randy.dunlap@oracle.com> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar --- Documentation/mutex-design.txt | 3 ++- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) (limited to 'Documentation/mutex-design.txt') diff --git a/Documentation/mutex-design.txt b/Documentation/mutex-design.txt index c91ccc0720fa..38c10fd7f411 100644 --- a/Documentation/mutex-design.txt +++ b/Documentation/mutex-design.txt @@ -9,7 +9,7 @@ firstly, there's nothing wrong with semaphores. But if the simpler mutex semantics are sufficient for your code, then there are a couple of advantages of mutexes: - - 'struct mutex' is smaller on most architectures: .e.g on x86, + - 'struct mutex' is smaller on most architectures: E.g. on x86, 'struct semaphore' is 20 bytes, 'struct mutex' is 16 bytes. A smaller structure size means less RAM footprint, and better CPU-cache utilization. @@ -136,3 +136,4 @@ the APIs of 'struct mutex' have been streamlined: void mutex_lock_nested(struct mutex *lock, unsigned int subclass); int mutex_lock_interruptible_nested(struct mutex *lock, unsigned int subclass); + int atomic_dec_and_mutex_lock(atomic_t *cnt, struct mutex *lock); -- cgit v1.2.3