Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2001 11:43:29 -0800 (PST) From: Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org> To: Mike Smith <msmith@freebsd.org> Cc: Alfred Perlstein <bright@mu.org>, arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: the condvar stuff. Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0112271135510.84622-100000@InterJet.elischer.org> In-Reply-To: <200112271943.fBRJh0F01276@mass.dis.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
so, is there such a thing in pthread condvars as an uncancellable condvar? On Thu, 27 Dec 2001, Mike Smith wrote: > No, they are condition variables. > > They exist to provide a mechanism that is familiar to a large number of > thread programmers, and which has a good body of related algorithms > already established. > > They directly parallel the condition variables found in the pthread > library, again keeping the kernel and userland programming metaphors as > close as is practical. I don't know how good an idea this is.. we are getting VERY kitchen-sinky in the kernel. Can I have a C++ allocator too? enumerate: mem allocators: mbuf/malloc/zalloc/kvalloc-etal/bus-space-alloc synchronisation: primatives CV/msleep/mtx/sx/lockmanager(gone?) thread schemes: (aio/kthreads/linux-thread-support/KSE) etc :-) 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?Pine.BSF.4.21.0112271135510.84622-100000>