Re: [lwip-users] Do functions like sys_mbox_invalid() need to be thread safe?

2021-11-10 Thread goldsi...@gmx.de
Am 10.11.2021 um 22:34 schrieb Grant Edwards: [..] I don't quite understand: what does "points are safe" mean? I mean for one object, lock/unlock, post/fetch or signal/wait can be called by multiple threads simultaneously, but deallocation is ensured to be called from one thread only, when the

Re: [lwip-users] Do functions like sys_mbox_invalid() need to be thread safe?

2021-11-10 Thread Grant Edwards
On 2021-11-10, goldsi...@gmx.de wrote: > >> I mean can two invocations of the sys_* (mailbox, mutex or semaphore) >> functions happen "at the same time". For example: can the execution >> of one call to sys_{sem,mutex,mbox}_set_invalid() be interrupted or >> suspended by another call to that same

Re: [lwip-users] Do functions like sys_mbox_invalid() need to be thread safe?

2021-11-10 Thread goldsi...@gmx.de
Am 10.11.2021 um 22:04 schrieb Grant Edwards: On 2021-11-10, goldsi...@gmx.de wrote: Am 10.11.2021 um 20:43 schrieb Grant Edwards: I'm workikng on a port done by somebody else, and they seem to have assumed that functions like sys_mbox_set_invalid() don't need to be thread-safe. But, they

Re: [lwip-users] Do functions like sys_mbox_invalid() need to be thread safe?

2021-11-10 Thread Grant Edwards
On 2021-11-10, goldsi...@gmx.de wrote: > Am 10.11.2021 um 20:43 schrieb Grant Edwards: >> I'm workikng on a port done by somebody else, and they seem to have >> assumed that functions like sys_mbox_set_invalid() don't need to be >> thread-safe. But, they did add mutexes to make sure that some >

Re: [lwip-users] Do functions like sys_mbox_invalid() need to be thread safe?

2021-11-10 Thread goldsi...@gmx.de
Am 10.11.2021 um 20:43 schrieb Grant Edwards: I'm workikng on a port done by somebody else, and they seem to have assumed that functions like sys_mbox_set_invalid() don't need to be thread-safe. But, they did add mutexes to make sure that some other functions like like sys_mbox_free() and _new()