From owner-freebsd-current Thu Feb 8 9:21:10 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mail.du.gtn.com (mail.du.gtn.com [194.77.9.57]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 23F4337B4EC for ; Thu, 8 Feb 2001 09:20:50 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.cicely.de (cicely.de [194.231.9.142]) by mail.du.gtn.com (8.11.0.Beta3/8.11.0.Beta3) with ESMTP id f18HKkl24631 (using TLSv1/SSLv3 with cipher EDH-RSA-DES-CBC3-SHA (168 bits) verified OK) for ; Thu, 8 Feb 2001 18:20:48 +0100 (MET) Received: from cicely5.cicely.de (cicely5.cicely.de [fec0:0:0:104::5]) by mail.cicely.de (8.11.0.Beta1/8.11.0.Beta1) with ESMTP id f18HL7P79452 (using TLSv1/SSLv3 with cipher EDH-RSA-DES-CBC3-SHA (168 bits) verified NO) for ; Thu, 8 Feb 2001 18:21:13 +0100 (CET) Received: (from ticso@localhost) by cicely5.cicely.de (8.11.1/8.11.1) id f18HL7B80771 for freebsd-current@freebsd.org; Thu, 8 Feb 2001 18:21:07 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from ticso) Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2001 18:21:07 +0100 From: Bernd Walter To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: atomic_ question Message-ID: <20010208182106.B80741@cicely5.cicely.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 1.0.1i Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Are atomic_* implementations allowed to spin/sleep? The question is because some platforms don't have atomic operations for adding and so on (e.g. sparcv8). The only way to implement them on these platforms is to use a lock. Now I'm wonder if the use of a sleep mutex is allowed or is a simple spinning lock the sensefull choice. One of the results is that there is no mutex/lock allocated specially for this purpose and there is a need to allocate one globaly for all. -- B.Walter COSMO-Project http://www.cosmo-project.de ticso@cicely.de Usergroup info@cosmo-project.de To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message