Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 22 Oct 2009 16:50:32 -0400 (EDT)
From:      Daniel Eischen <deischen@freebsd.org>
To:        Andrew Gallatin <gallatin@cs.duke.edu>
Cc:        freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, Christian Bell <christian@myri.com>
Subject:   Re: semaphores between processes
Message-ID:  <Pine.GSO.4.64.0910221649420.11443@sea.ntplx.net>
In-Reply-To: <4AE0BBAB.3040807@cs.duke.edu>
References:  <4AE0BBAB.3040807@cs.duke.edu>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, 22 Oct 2009, Andrew Gallatin wrote:

> Hi,
>
> We're designing some software which has to lock access to
> shared memory pages between several processes, and has to
> run on Linux, Solaris, and FreeBSD.  We were planning to
> have the lock be a pthread_mutex_t residing in the
> shared memory page.  This works well on Linux and Solaris,
> but FreeBSD (at least 7-stable) does not support
> PTHREAD_PROCESS_SHARED mutexes.
>
> We then moved on to posix semaphores.  Using sem_wait/sem_post
> with the sem_t residing in a shared page seems to work on
> all 3 platforms.  However, the FreeBSD (7-stable) man page
> for sem_init(3) has this scary text regarding the pshared
> value:
>
>     The sem_init() function initializes the unnamed semaphore pointed to by
>     sem to have the value value.  A non-zero value for pshared specifies a
>     shared semaphore that can be used by multiple processes, which this
>     implementation is not capable of.
>
> Is this text obsolete?  Or is my test just "getting lucky"?

I think you're getting lucky.

> Is there recommended way to do this?

I believe the only way to do this is with SYSV semaphores
(semop, semget, semctl).  Unfortunately, these are not as
easy to use, IMHO.

-- 
DE



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.GSO.4.64.0910221649420.11443>