Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 28 Aug 2006 03:22:15 +0800 | From | "Dong Feng" <> | Subject | Why Semaphore Hardware-Dependent? |
| |
Why can't we have a hardware-independent semaphore definition while we have already had hardware-dependent spinlock, rwlock, and rcu lock? It seems the semaphore definitions classified into two major categories. The main deference is whether there is a member variable _sleeper_. Does this (optional) member indicate any hardware family gene?
Best Regards. Feng,Dong - 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/
| |