lkml.org 
[lkml]   [1999]   [Sep]   [15]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: POSIX aio vs completion ports
On Wed, Sep 15, 1999 at 01:15:43AM +0100, "Stephen C. Tweedie" <sct@redhat.com> wrote:
> > no, it isn't a non-kernel issue. this must be done atomically wrt the
> > user level,
>
> No, it must be atomic between threads. No big deal, the user-mode code
> can use a lock. It's a non-kernel issue.

I think the problem he _wanted_ to make clear is that different libraries
would have to agree on some totally non-standard extra library not currently
available. Not a kernel issue, anyway.

And as other people, have shown, sigactioin is enough atomicity to ensure
that, and it exists already,

--
-----==- |
----==-- _ |
---==---(_)__ __ ____ __ Marc Lehmann +--
--==---/ / _ \/ // /\ \/ / pcg@goof.com |e|
-=====/_/_//_/\_,_/ /_/\_\ XX11-RIPE --+
The choice of a GNU generation |
|

-
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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:54    [W:0.167 / U:0.192 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site