On Fri, Jul 18, 2008 at 11:58 AM, Jilles Tjoelker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, Jul 12, 2008 at 07:11:26PM -0400, Michael B Allen wrote:
Below is a semtimedop(2) implementation that I'm using for FreeBSD. I
was hoping someone could look it over and tell me if they think the
implementation
On Friday 18 July 2008 12:27:05 pm Sean C. Farley wrote:
On Thu, 17 Jul 2008, Michael B Allen wrote:
*snip*
But I'll keep it in mind for the future. I don't recall why I chose
System V semaphores originally. I think process-shared semantics in
the POSIX implementations where not mature
On Sat, Jul 12, 2008 at 07:11:26PM -0400, Michael B Allen wrote:
Below is a semtimedop(2) implementation that I'm using for FreeBSD. I
was hoping someone could look it over and tell me if they think the
implementation is sound.
[snip semtimedop implementation that uses SIGALRM and relies on
On Thu, 17 Jul 2008, Michael B Allen wrote:
*snip*
But I'll keep it in mind for the future. I don't recall why I chose
System V semaphores originally. I think process-shared semantics in
the POSIX implementations where not mature at the time. I would love
to move away from System V semaphores.
On Saturday 12 July 2008 07:11:26 pm Michael B Allen wrote:
Hi,
Below is a semtimedop(2) implementation that I'm using for FreeBSD. I
was hoping someone could look it over and tell me if they think the
implementation is sound.
The code seems to work ok but when stressing the FreeBSD build
On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 10:05 AM, John Baldwin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Saturday 12 July 2008 07:11:26 pm Michael B Allen wrote:
Hi,
Below is a semtimedop(2) implementation that I'm using for FreeBSD. I
was hoping someone could look it over and tell me if they think the
implementation is
On Thursday 17 July 2008 01:42:31 pm Michael B Allen wrote:
On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 10:05 AM, John Baldwin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Saturday 12 July 2008 07:11:26 pm Michael B Allen wrote:
Hi,
Below is a semtimedop(2) implementation that I'm using for FreeBSD. I
was hoping someone
On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 8:15 PM, John Baldwin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thursday 17 July 2008 01:42:31 pm Michael B Allen wrote:
On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 10:05 AM, John Baldwin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Saturday 12 July 2008 07:11:26 pm Michael B Allen wrote:
Hi,
Below is a
Hi,
Below is a semtimedop(2) implementation that I'm using for FreeBSD. I
was hoping someone could look it over and tell me if they think the
implementation is sound.
The code seems to work ok but when stressing the FreeBSD build of my app
I have managed to provoke errors related to concurrency
On Sun, 13 Jul 2008, Michael B Allen wrote:
Hi,
Below is a semtimedop(2) implementation that I'm using for FreeBSD. I
was hoping someone could look it over and tell me if they think the
implementation is sound.
The code seems to work ok but when stressing the FreeBSD build of my app
I have
On 7/13/08, Mikko Työläjärvi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, 13 Jul 2008, Michael B Allen wrote:
Hi,
Below is a semtimedop(2) implementation that I'm using for FreeBSD. I
was hoping someone could look it over and tell me if they think the
implementation is sound.
The code seems
Hi,
Below is a semtimedop(2) implementation that I'm using for FreeBSD. I
was hoping someone could look it over and tell me if they think the
implementation is sound.
The code seems to work ok but when stressing the FreeBSD build of my app
I have managed to provoke errors related to concurrency
12 matches
Mail list logo
