Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1999 15:49:08 -0700 From: Nate Williams <nate@mt.sri.com> To: Terry Lambert <tlambert@primenet.com> Cc: nate@mt.sri.com (Nate Williams), narvi@haldjas.folklore.ee, wes@softweyr.com, bright@hotjobs.com, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: question about re-entrancy. Message-ID: <199901052249.PAA10421@mt.sri.com> In-Reply-To: <199901052245.PAA24981@usr02.primenet.com> References: <199901052008.NAA09332@mt.sri.com> <199901052245.PAA24981@usr02.primenet.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > > The third way (about which Terry did talk) is to have locks around > > > critical sections. > > > > That *is* what an 'object lock' in RTEMS is. > > No. An object lock is associated with an object. A critical section > lock is associated with a section of code. An object lock can be associated with a lock that does nothing but associate itself with a critical section. *sheesh* This ain't rocket science. Nate To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199901052249.PAA10421>