Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 13:31:11 -0800 From: Jason Evans <jasone@canonware.com> To: Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org> Cc: Andrew Kenneth Milton <akm@mail.theinternet.com.au>, current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Voodoo3 + XFree4 + DRM - simple_lock ? :-) Message-ID: <20010130133111.G17900@canonware.com> In-Reply-To: <3A772F8D.76F3E6C1@elischer.org>; from julian@elischer.org on Tue, Jan 30, 2001 at 01:18:05PM -0800 References: <20010131045430.R11513@zeus.theinternet.com.au> <20010130131111.F17900@canonware.com> <3A772F8D.76F3E6C1@elischer.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Jan 30, 2001 at 01:18:05PM -0800, Julian Elischer wrote: > Jason Evans wrote: > > > > Mutexes should be used in places where simplelocks were used. With few > > exceptions, sleep mutexes should be used (even though simplelocks were spin > > locks). See mutex(9) for details. Be forewarned that there is work in > > progress to clean up the mutex API that will probably be checked in within > > a week. Transitioning from the current mutex API to the upcoming one will > > be trivial, but it will have to be done if you convert to mutexes in the > > next few days. > > where can we see the new spec (or at least a sample)? This is the most recent patch. I expect that the final result will be pretty similar, though Bosko may still change a couple of details: http://people.freebsd.org/~bmilekic/code/mutex_cleanup-5.patch Jason To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20010130133111.G17900>