On 06/09/2011 12:31 AM, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
Good catch! I missed those parts from the urcu.c wait/wakeup scheme
(decrement initially, and also set to 0 explicitely when breaking the
loop without waiting). I just added them with commit
c768e45ed336970a42e58e679804f0f455422cd8

Yes, looks good.

Paolo

_______________________________________________
ltt-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.casi.polymtl.ca/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ltt-dev

Reply via email to