From owner-freebsd-smp  Wed Jan  1 04:21:10 1997
Return-Path: <owner-smp>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.4/8.8.4) id EAA25573
          for smp-outgoing; Wed, 1 Jan 1997 04:21:10 -0800 (PST)
Received: from tfs.com (tfs.com [140.145.250.1])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.4/8.8.4) with SMTP id EAA25568
          for <smp@freebsd.org>; Wed, 1 Jan 1997 04:21:08 -0800 (PST)
Received: from schizo.dk.tfs.com by tfs.com (smail3.1.28.1) with SMTP
	id m0vfPeu-0003whC; Wed, 1 Jan 97 04:20 PST
Received: from critter.dk.tfs.com (critter-home [193.162.32.19]) by schizo.dk.tfs.com (8.8.2/8.7.3) with ESMTP id NAA24977 for <smp@freebsd.org>; Wed, 1 Jan 1997 13:20:33 +0100 (MET)
Received: from critter.dk.tfs.com (localhost.phk.dk [127.0.0.1]) by critter.dk.tfs.com (8.8.2/8.8.2) with ESMTP id NAA12455 for <smp@freebsd.org>; Wed, 1 Jan 1997 13:23:20 +0100 (MET)
To: smp@freebsd.org
Subject: atomic locking and <sys/queue.h>
Reply-to: phk@freebsd.org
Date: Wed, 01 Jan 1997 13:23:19 +0100
Message-ID: <12453.852121399@critter.dk.tfs.com>
From: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@critter.dk.tfs.com>
Sender: owner-smp@freebsd.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk


My intuition tells me that we could avoid a great deal of cluttering
"lock(); foo; unlock();" in our sources if (some of) the macros in
<sys/queue.h> were made to be atomic.

Would it make sense to make a version of the various queues that had
built in locking ?

--
Poul-Henning Kamp           | phk@FreeBSD.ORG       FreeBSD Core-team.
http://www.freebsd.org/~phk | phk@login.dknet.dk    Private mailbox.
whois: [PHK]                | phk@tfs.com	    TRW Financial Systems, Inc.
Future will arrive by its own means, progress not so.