[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       linux-kernel
Subject:    Re: POSIX aio vs completion ports
From:       Marc Lehmann <pcg () opengroup ! org>
Date:       1999-09-15 14:32:26
[Download RAW message or body]

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/

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]