1 files changed, 0 insertions, 135 deletions
diff --git a/old/xenolinux-2.4.16-sparse/include/asm-xeno/locks.h b/old/xenolinux-2.4.16-sparse/include/asm-xeno/locks.h
deleted file mode 100644
index ffcab0afb6..0000000000
--- a/old/xenolinux-2.4.16-sparse/include/asm-xeno/locks.h
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,135 +0,0 @@
-/*
- *	SMP locks primitives for building ix86 locks
- *	(not yet used).
- *
- *		Alan Cox, alan@redhat.com, 1995
- */
- 
-/*
- *	This would be much easier but far less clear and easy
- *	to borrow for other processors if it was just assembler.
- */
-
-static __inline__ void prim_spin_lock(struct spinlock *sp)
-{
-	int processor=smp_processor_id();
-	
-	/*
-	 *	Grab the lock bit
-	 */
-	 
-	while(lock_set_bit(0,&sp->lock))
-	{
-		/*
-		 *	Failed, but that's cos we own it!
-		 */
-		 
-		if(sp->cpu==processor)
-		{
-			sp->users++;
-			return 0;
-		}
-		/*
-		 *	Spin in the cache S state if possible
-		 */
-		while(sp->lock)
-		{
-			/*
-			 *	Wait for any invalidates to go off
-			 */
-			 
-			if(smp_invalidate_needed&(1<<processor))
-				while(lock_clear_bit(processor,&smp_invalidate_needed))
-					local_flush_tlb();
-			sp->spins++;
-		}
-		/*
-		 *	Someone wrote the line, we go 'I' and get
-		 *	the cache entry. Now try to regrab
-		 */
-	}
-	sp->users++;sp->cpu=processor;
-	return 1;
-}
-
-/*
- *	Release a spin lock
- */
- 
-static __inline__ int prim_spin_unlock(struct spinlock *sp)
-{
-	/* This is safe. The decrement is still guarded by the lock. A multilock would
-	   not be safe this way */
-	if(!--sp->users)
-	{
-		sp->cpu= NO_PROC_ID;lock_clear_bit(0,&sp->lock);
-		return 1;
-	}
-	return 0;
-}
-
-
-/*
- *	Non blocking lock grab
- */
- 
-static __inline__ int prim_spin_lock_nb(struct spinlock *sp)
-{
-	if(lock_set_bit(0,&sp->lock))
-		return 0;		/* Locked already */
-	sp->users++;
-	return 1;			/* We got the lock */
-}
-
-
-/*
- *	These wrap the locking primitives up for usage
- */
- 
-static __inline__ void spinlock(struct spinlock *sp)
-{
-	if(sp->priority<current->lock_order)
-		panic("lock order violation: %s (%d)\n", sp->name, current->lock_order);
-	if(prim_spin_lock(sp))
-	{
-		/*
-		 *	We got a new lock. Update the priority chain
-		 */
-		sp->oldpri=current->lock_order;
-		current->lock_order=sp->priority;
-	}
-}
-
-static __inline__ void spinunlock(struct spinlock *sp)
-{
-	int pri;
-	if(current->lock_order!=sp->priority)
-		panic("lock release order violation %s (%d)\n", sp->name, current->lock_order);
-	pri=sp->oldpri;
-	if(prim_spin_unlock(sp))
-	{
-		/*
-		 *	Update the debugging lock priority chain. We dumped
-		 *	our last right to the lock.
-		 */
-		current->lock_order=sp->pri;
-	}	
-}
-
-static __inline__ void spintestlock(struct spinlock *sp)
-{
-	/*
-	 *	We do no sanity checks, it's legal to optimistically
-	 *	get a lower lock.
-	 */
-	prim_spin_lock_nb(sp);
-}
-
-static __inline__ void spintestunlock(struct spinlock *sp)
-{
-	/*
-	 *	A testlock doesn't update the lock chain so we
-	 *	must not update it on free
-	 */
-	prim_spin_unlock(sp);
-}