From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG  Wed Sep 19 16:29:05 2007
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A28016A468;
	Wed, 19 Sep 2007 16:29:05 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from jkim@FreeBSD.org)
Received: from anuket.mj.niksun.com (gwnew.niksun.com [65.115.46.162])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2484A13C4A3;
	Wed, 19 Sep 2007 16:29:04 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from jkim@FreeBSD.org)
Received: from niksun.com (anuket [10.70.0.5])
	by anuket.mj.niksun.com (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id l8JGT46M081137;
	Wed, 19 Sep 2007 12:29:04 -0400 (EDT)
	(envelope-from jkim@FreeBSD.org)
From: Jung-uk Kim <jkim@FreeBSD.org>
To: Maxime Henrion <mux@FreeBSD.org>
Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2007 12:28:58 -0400
User-Agent: KMail/1.6.2
References: <200709181516.11207.jkim@FreeBSD.org>
	<20070919150348.GB73569@elvis.mu.org>
In-Reply-To: <20070919150348.GB73569@elvis.mu.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <200709191229.00966.jkim@FreeBSD.org>
X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV 0.90.2/4341/Wed Sep 19 11:11:47 2007 on
	anuket.mj.niksun.com
X-Virus-Status: Clean
Cc: freebsd-acpi@FreeBSD.org, freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] OsdSynch.c modernization
X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current
	<freebsd-current.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2007 16:29:05 -0000

On Wednesday 19 September 2007 11:03 am, Maxime Henrion wrote:
> Out of curiosity, is there any reason you didn't use the sema(9)
> API for semaphores and are instead implementing them in terms of
> mutex/condvar?

sema(9) can only increment/decrement value by one while 
AcpiOs*Semaphore() allows any positive units <= maximum units.  
Internally ACPI-CA does not use units > 1 but I want it to be more 
closer to the original intention.  In fact, Linux OSD code does not 
support units > 1. ;-)

Jung-uk Kim