Re: [PATCH] Futexes IV (Fast Lightweight Userspace Semaphores)

From: Ulrich Drepper (drepper@redhat.com)
Date: Mon Mar 18 2002 - 23:05:22 EST


On Mon, 2002-03-18 at 19:28, Rusty Russell wrote:

> What do you WANT in a kernel primitive then? Given that we now have mutexes,
> what else do we need to make pthreads relatively painless?

I think wrt to the mutexes only wake-all is missing. I don't think that
semaphore semantic is needed in the kernel.

> Look, here is an example implementation. Please suggest:
> 1) Where this is flawed,
> 2) Where this is suboptimal,
> 3) What kernel primitive would help to resolve these?

I'll look at this a bit later.

-- 
---------------.                          ,-.   1325 Chesapeake Terrace
Ulrich Drepper  \    ,-------------------'   \  Sunnyvale, CA 94089 USA
Red Hat          `--' drepper at redhat.com   `------------------------


- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Mar 23 2002 - 22:00:17 EST