On Sun, 16 May 1999, Gerard Roudier wrote:

> > Think harder, the issue is that we eliminate completely any races
> > between the adding to wait queue and test of the event.  The task
> > himself controls completely his existence on the wait queue.
[...]

> It is perhaps correct in theory, but it pollutes most of kernel data
> structures with wait_queues.

so 'channels' do not have to be added to objects?

> For example, what happens if we free a data structure with some not 
> empty wait queue in it ?

we dont use and sleep on any kernel object without getting a reference to
it.

-- mingo


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/