Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: Robust futexes | From | Daniel Walker <> | Date | Fri, 17 Feb 2006 07:47:34 -0800 |
| |
On Fri, 2006-02-17 at 15:57 +1100, Rusty Russell wrote: > Hi Ingo, all, > > Noticed (via LWN, hence the delay) your robust futex work. Have you > considered the less-perfect, but simpler option of simply having futex > calls which tell the kernel that the u32 value is in fact the holder's > TID? > > In this case, you don't get perfect robustness when TID wrap occurs: > the kernel won't know that the lock holder is dead. However, it's > simple, and telling the kernel that the lock is the tid allows the > kernel to do prio inheritence etc. in future.
I think this was Todd Kneisel's approach . His version was vma scanning, which is what Ingo is trying to replace. It just used the current u32 value .
Daniel
- 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/
| |