Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2000 16:01:47 +0930 From: Greg Lehey <grog@lemis.com> To: Joerg Micheel <joerg@cs.waikato.ac.nz> Cc: John Baldwin <jhb@pike.osd.bsdi.com>, Chuck Paterson <cp@bsdi.com>, Jason Evans <jasone@canonware.com>, arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Long-term mutex ownership (was Re: Interruptable mutex aquires.) Message-ID: <20000912160147.A23948@wantadilla.lemis.com> In-Reply-To: <20000912175725.A70000@cs.waikato.ac.nz>; from joerg@cs.waikato.ac.nz on Tue, Sep 12, 2000 at 05:57:25PM %2B1200 References: <20000912143855.O88615@wantadilla.lemis.com> <200009120515.WAA78736@pike.osd.bsdi.com> <20000912175725.A70000@cs.waikato.ac.nz>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tuesday, 12 September 2000 at 17:57:25 +1200, Joerg Micheel wrote: > On Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 10:15:25PM -0700, John Baldwin wrote: >> Greg Lehey wrote: >>> The general consensus (which I currently don't yet share) is that we >>> should use condition variables for things like async event waits. I'm >>> still looking for a consistent definition of condition variables, and >>> how they differ from "mutexes". >> >> Go grab Andrew S. Tannebaum's (sp?) _Modern_Operating_Systems_. One of >> the first chapters gives execellent treatment to comparing/contrasting >> mutexes, semaphores, condition variables, and sleep/wakeup. > > ... and once you are done with it find out that it is all the same > just offering different views onto something that can be implemented > and used in exactly the same way. I've just gone through this - > trying to explain it to 239 second years students - I can't see any > difference. My point exactly. Greg -- Finger grog@lemis.com for PGP public key See complete headers for address and phone numbers To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20000912160147.A23948>