Date: Wed, 6 Jan 2010 03:38:35 +0100 From: Attilio Rao <attilio@freebsd.org> To: David Xu <davidxu@freebsd.org> Cc: FreeBSD Current <freebsd-current@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: process-sharable pthread synchronous objects Message-ID: <3bbf2fe11001051838t38e872d3jae6c4f8be9e57ebc@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <4B43E358.609@freebsd.org> References: <4B43E358.609@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
2010/1/6 David Xu <davidxu@freebsd.org>: > I want to go further to make some pthread synchronous objects > process-sharable, do you guy think it is worthy ? > except mutex and condition variable, others like rwlock and spinlock > are relative simple. I'm afraid people is going to produce very messy system resulting in process shared mutexes where IPC or threads may be used and causing more harms than good. Besides that, semaphore can "emulate" a fair amount of locking features in a non-trivial fashion, forcing developers to think a lot about it, thus reducing the risk of error. Said that, I think that introducing shared semaphore has been a good idea, but I would not go further than that. Thanks, Attilio -- Peace can only be achieved by understanding - A. Einstein
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3bbf2fe11001051838t38e872d3jae6c4f8be9e57ebc>