On Sat, Oct 18, 2008 at 11:29 PM, Jack O'Quin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > This is wrong. For the single reader, single writer case, atomic operations > are *not* necessary. The bug, as was already pointed out, is due to storing
Let's agree to disagree, then. Single-reader, single-writer does not automatically make something SMP safe. There is large body of literature on lock-free data structures that agrees with me; someone posted a link to a collection of those earlier in the thread. > the unmasked pointer in the ringbuffer, allowing the other thread to see it > in an invalid state. Paul Davis disagrees, and I have yet to come up with a scenario where read_ptr can be assigned a value larger than size. And I'm the one who pointed out the bug in the first place. _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-dev mailing list Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
