Date: Wed, 5 Jul 2000 23:06:32 +0000 (GMT) From: Terry Lambert <tlambert@primenet.com> To: grog@lemis.com (Greg Lehey) Cc: cp@bsdi.com (Chuck Paterson), eischen@vigrid.com (Daniel Eischen), jasone@canonware.com (Jason Evans), luoqi@watermarkgroup.com (Luoqi Chen), smp@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: SMP meeting summary Message-ID: <200007052306.QAA27004@usr05.primenet.com> In-Reply-To: <20000704120930.G94351@wantadilla.lemis.com> from "Greg Lehey" at Jul 04, 2000 12:09:30 PM
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> I've never been able to understand the advantages of > conditional variables, which may be my viewpoint, or it may be some > basic lack of understanding. You can use the address of the mutex in a condition variable in the same set of sleep/contention spaces that you use any other mutex. This means that you can do deadlock detection, without having to consider multiple name spaces (e.g. one for mutexes, and another for event flags). The other neat thing is that you can treat them opaquely in the manipulation routines, so long as the address of the mutex is always what's used, and you don't know if it is a mutex protecting a structure, or an event flag, or something else. Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200007052306.QAA27004>