On Apr 18, 2005, at 6:33 PM, Jeffrey Hutzelman wrote:
On Monday, April 18, 2005 05:01:06 PM +0200 Horst Birthelmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Most implementations don't have an atomic cond_wait since it's not mandatory by POSIX ;-) It's just you have to treat it that way since there's no guaranty that you can rely on an atomic implementation.
Ok, according to POSIX this paragraph was completely wrong. I admit I didn't read the passage careful enough. My apology for that ...
Here's that part again for hopefully clarifying things:
These functions [pthread_cont_timedwait, pthread_cond_wait]
atomically release _mutex_ and cause the calling thread to block on
the condition variable _cond_; atomically here means "atomically
with respect to access by another thread to the mutex and then the
condition variable". That is, if another thread is able to acquire
the mutex after the about-to-block thread has released it, then a
subsequence call to pthread_cond_broadcast() or
pthread_cond_signal() in that thread shall behave as if it were
issued after the about-to-block thread has blocked.
-- IEEE Std. 1003.1-2001, p. 1032
Horst
_______________________________________________ OpenAFS-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-devel
