Jaroslav Kysela wrote: > > On Mon, 17 Feb 2003, Abramo Bagnara wrote: > > > You're wrong: xadd is atomic but xadd/read/saturation/write is not. > > > > Without the loop I've added you risk to write on hw_ring_buffer an *old* > > value: > > > > A: B: > > xadd > > read > > xadd > > read > > saturate > > write > > saturate > > write > > I see, the read/saturate/write must be atomic, too. In this case, it would > be better to use a global (or a set of) mutex(es) to lock the hardware > ring buffer. The futexes are nice.
They are nice indeed, but definitely not the right solution here. Although I don't know if it's the absolute best solution, the 'retry' approach I've proposed is far better and much more efficient. -- Abramo Bagnara mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Opera Unica Phone: +39.546.656023 Via Emilia Interna, 140 48014 Castel Bolognese (RA) - Italy ------------------------------------------------------- This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek Welcome to geek heaven. http://thinkgeek.com/sf _______________________________________________ Alsa-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/alsa-devel
