Attilio Rao wrote:
2009/9/29 John Baldwin j...@freebsd.org:
On Tuesday 29 September 2009 4:42:13 pm Attilio Rao wrote:
2009/9/29 Max Laier m...@love2party.net:
On Tuesday 29 September 2009 17:39:37 Attilio Rao wrote:
2009/9/25 Fabio Checconi fa...@freebsd.org:
Hi all,
looking at sys/sx.h I
2009/9/29 John Baldwin j...@freebsd.org:
On Tuesday 29 September 2009 4:42:13 pm Attilio Rao wrote:
2009/9/29 Max Laier m...@love2party.net:
On Tuesday 29 September 2009 17:39:37 Attilio Rao wrote:
2009/9/25 Fabio Checconi fa...@freebsd.org:
Hi all,
looking at sys/sx.h I have some
On Tuesday 29 September 2009 5:39:43 pm Attilio Rao wrote:
2009/9/29 John Baldwin j...@freebsd.org:
On Tuesday 29 September 2009 4:42:13 pm Attilio Rao wrote:
2009/9/29 Max Laier m...@love2party.net:
On Tuesday 29 September 2009 17:39:37 Attilio Rao wrote:
2009/9/25 Fabio Checconi
2009/9/25 Fabio Checconi fa...@freebsd.org:
Hi all,
looking at sys/sx.h I have some troubles understanding this comment:
* A note about memory barriers. Exclusive locks need to use the same
* memory barriers as mutexes: _acq when acquiring an exclusive lock
* and _rel when releasing an
On Tuesday 29 September 2009 17:39:37 Attilio Rao wrote:
2009/9/25 Fabio Checconi fa...@freebsd.org:
Hi all,
looking at sys/sx.h I have some troubles understanding this comment:
* A note about memory barriers. Exclusive locks need to use the same
* memory barriers as mutexes: _acq
On Tuesday 29 September 2009 11:39:37 am Attilio Rao wrote:
2009/9/25 Fabio Checconi fa...@freebsd.org:
Hi all,
looking at sys/sx.h I have some troubles understanding this comment:
* A note about memory barriers. Exclusive locks need to use the same
* memory barriers as mutexes:
2009/9/29 John Baldwin j...@freebsd.org:
On Tuesday 29 September 2009 11:39:37 am Attilio Rao wrote:
2009/9/25 Fabio Checconi fa...@freebsd.org:
Hi all,
looking at sys/sx.h I have some troubles understanding this comment:
* A note about memory barriers. Exclusive locks need to use the
On Tuesday 29 September 2009 3:15:40 pm Attilio Rao wrote:
2009/9/29 John Baldwin j...@freebsd.org:
On Tuesday 29 September 2009 11:39:37 am Attilio Rao wrote:
2009/9/25 Fabio Checconi fa...@freebsd.org:
Hi all,
looking at sys/sx.h I have some troubles understanding this comment:
2009/9/29 John Baldwin j...@freebsd.org:
On Tuesday 29 September 2009 3:15:40 pm Attilio Rao wrote:
2009/9/29 John Baldwin j...@freebsd.org:
On Tuesday 29 September 2009 11:39:37 am Attilio Rao wrote:
2009/9/25 Fabio Checconi fa...@freebsd.org:
Hi all,
looking at sys/sx.h I have some
2009/9/29 Max Laier m...@love2party.net:
On Tuesday 29 September 2009 17:39:37 Attilio Rao wrote:
2009/9/25 Fabio Checconi fa...@freebsd.org:
Hi all,
looking at sys/sx.h I have some troubles understanding this comment:
* A note about memory barriers. Exclusive locks need to use the
On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 21:15, Attilio Rao atti...@freebsd.org wrote:
2009/9/29 John Baldwin j...@freebsd.org:
On Tuesday 29 September 2009 11:39:37 am Attilio Rao wrote:
2009/9/25 Fabio Checconi fa...@freebsd.org:
Hi all,
looking at sys/sx.h I have some troubles understanding this
2009/9/29 Marius Nünnerich mar...@nuenneri.ch:
On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 21:15, Attilio Rao atti...@freebsd.org wrote:
2009/9/29 John Baldwin j...@freebsd.org:
On Tuesday 29 September 2009 11:39:37 am Attilio Rao wrote:
2009/9/25 Fabio Checconi fa...@freebsd.org:
Hi all,
looking at sys/sx.h
On Tuesday 29 September 2009 4:26:56 pm Marius Nünnerich wrote:
On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 21:15, Attilio Rao atti...@freebsd.org wrote:
2009/9/29 John Baldwin j...@freebsd.org:
On Tuesday 29 September 2009 11:39:37 am Attilio Rao wrote:
2009/9/25 Fabio Checconi fa...@freebsd.org:
Hi all,
On Tuesday 29 September 2009 4:42:13 pm Attilio Rao wrote:
2009/9/29 Max Laier m...@love2party.net:
On Tuesday 29 September 2009 17:39:37 Attilio Rao wrote:
2009/9/25 Fabio Checconi fa...@freebsd.org:
Hi all,
looking at sys/sx.h I have some troubles understanding this comment:
*
2009/9/29 John Baldwin j...@freebsd.org:
On Tuesday 29 September 2009 4:42:13 pm Attilio Rao wrote:
2009/9/29 Max Laier m...@love2party.net:
On Tuesday 29 September 2009 17:39:37 Attilio Rao wrote:
2009/9/25 Fabio Checconi fa...@freebsd.org:
Hi all,
looking at sys/sx.h I have some
On Fri, 2009-09-25 at 00:49 +0200, Fabio Checconi wrote:
Hi all,
looking at sys/sx.h I have some troubles understanding this comment:
* A note about memory barriers. Exclusive locks need to use the same
* memory barriers as mutexes: _acq when acquiring an exclusive lock
* and _rel
The code that Fabio proposes looks like this:
sx_slock(data-lock);
if (data-buffer)
a = *data-buffer;
sx_sunlock(data-lock);
This point is that without a memory barrier on the unlock, the CPU is
free to reorder the instructions into the order is his message.
On Fri, 2009-09-25 at 09:30 -0400, Ryan Stone wrote:
The code that Fabio proposes looks like this:
sx_slock(data-lock);
if (data-buffer)
a = *data-buffer;
sx_sunlock(data-lock);
This point is that without a memory barrier on the unlock, the CPU is
free to reorder the instructions
Hi all,
looking at sys/sx.h I have some troubles understanding this comment:
* A note about memory barriers. Exclusive locks need to use the same
* memory barriers as mutexes: _acq when acquiring an exclusive lock
* and _rel when releasing an exclusive lock. On the other side,
* shared
19 matches
Mail list logo
