![]() | |||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
* Bill Davidsen <davidsen@tmr.com> wrote: > >>>There are no such situations anymore in an optimal userlevel > >>>implementation. The last problem (in pthread_cond_signal) was fixed > >>>by the addition of FUTEX_WAKE_OP. The userlevel code you're looking > >>>at is simply not optimized for the modern kernels. > >>What are you suggesting here, that the kernel can be inefficient as > >>long as the user has a way to program around it? > > > >What are you suggesting here, that FUTEX_WAKE_UP is a "user way to > >program around" an inefficiency? If yes then please explain to me why > >and what you would do differently. > > The point I'm making is that even if an application is "not optimized > for modern kernels" or whatever, there's no reason to ignore > inefficiencies. [...] What are you suggesting here, that the implementation of FUTEX_WAKE_UP is "ignoring inefficiencies"? Please explain why and what you would do differently to solve that inefficiency. Ingo - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ | ||||||||||
| Last update: 2006-03-31 08:06 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||