> -Original Message-
> From: Network Nut [mailto:sillyst...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Friday, January 31, 2014 5:00 PM
> To: 'Clemens Ladisch'
> Cc: 'Austin S. Hemmelgarn'; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
> Subject: RE: WaitForMultipleObjects/etc. In Kernel
&
> -Original Message-
> From: Clemens Ladisch [mailto:clem...@ladisch.de]
> Sent: Friday, January 31, 2014 4:54 PM
> To: Network Nut
> Cc: 'Austin S. Hemmelgarn'; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
> Subject: Re: WaitForMultipleObjects/etc. In Kernel
>
> Net
Network Nut wrote:
>> Assuming that you're porting to mainline distributions (and not embedded
>> devices), named SHM segments are accessible (providing the accessing
>> process has correct permissions) under /dev/shm. You just need to make
>> sure that you create the segment with the right permis
> -Original Message-
> From: Austin S. Hemmelgarn [mailto:ahferro...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Friday, January 31, 2014 11:05 AM
> To: Network Nut; 'Clemens Ladisch'
> Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
> Subject: Re: WaitForMultipleObjects/etc. In Kernel
> >>
On 01/30/2014 06:49 PM, Network Nut wrote:
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Clemens Ladisch [mailto:clem...@ladisch.de]
>> Sent: Wednesday, January 29, 2014 2:31 AM
>> To: Network Nut
>> Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
>> Subject: RE: WaitForMultiple
> -Original Message-
> From: Clemens Ladisch [mailto:clem...@ladisch.de]
> Sent: Wednesday, January 29, 2014 2:31 AM
> To: Network Nut
> Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
> Subject: RE: WaitForMultipleObjects/etc. In Kernel
>
> Network Nut wrote:
> >I was look
Network Nut wrote:
>I was looking at POSIX because it allows naming of the primitives.
Linux uses two orthogonal mechanisms for synchronization
primitives and for naming/sharing.
>I need to epoll_wait on inter-process {mutex, event, semaphore}.
Use eventfd.
>I need to reference inter-process {m
> -Original Message-
> From: Clemens Ladisch [mailto:clem...@ladisch.de]
> Sent: Tuesday, January 28, 2014 3:04 AM
> To: Network Nut
> Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
> Subject: Re: WaitForMultipleObjects/etc. In Kernel
>
> Network Nut wrote:
> > 5. I ca
Network Nut wrote:
> 5. I can simulate system-global named mutex using shared-memory for
> underlying state of mutex (POCO NamedMutex)
> 6. I can get named semaphore using POSIX sem_create
>
> It seems that the remaining problem is to get named mutex and named
> semaphore to be accessible by file-d
> Unrelated processes cannot directly open objects created by another
> process (with the exception of sockets and pipes, which can be created in
> the file system). However, sharing of any file descriptor is possible by
> sending it in a control message through a Unix domain socket.
I just spent
Network Nut wrote:
> As you know, under Windows, synchronization objects such as {event | mutex |
> semaphore | timer}; all have names that are computer-global. Process B can
> open, and use, any {event | mutex | semaphore | timer} that was created by
> process A, as long as Process B knows the nam
> -Original Message-
> From: Clemens Ladisch [mailto:clem...@ladisch.de]
> Sent: Sunday, January 26, 2014 12:33 PM
> To: Network Nut
> Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
> Subject: Re: WaitForMultipleObjects/etc. In Kernel
>
> Network Nut wrote:
> > I thin
Network Nut wrote:
> I think that the facility by which a thread can block while waiting for any
> of several synchronization primitives (*mutex*, *semaphore*, *event*,
> *waitable
> timer*)...is not only "nice to have", but fundamental to complex (clean)
> multi-threaded programming.
You mean a
Hi All,
This is my first post to anything Linux, so if there is a better mailing
list, please let me know.
I think that the facility by which a thread can block while waiting for any
of several synchronization primitives (*mutex*, *semaphore*, *event*,
*waitable
timer*)...is not only "nice to hav
14 matches
Mail list logo
