On Fri, 25 Aug 2000, Alan Cox wrote:
> > I don't have POSIX in front of me, but I do not think
> > the system must detect deadlock. It is allowed to detect
> > deadlock, and in case it happens to do so EDEADLK is the
> > apprpriate error return.
>
> Do you know if SuS is that relaxed ?
SuS v2 saith:
A potential for deadlock occurs if a process controlling a locked region
is put to sleep by attempting to lock another process' locked region. If
the system detects that sleeping until a locked region is unlocked would
cause a deadlock, fcntl() will fail with an [EDEADLK] error.
regards,
Tigran
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Aug 31 2000 - 21:00:15 EST