On Tue, May 06, 2014 at 08:20:29PM +0200, Matthias Drochner wrote: > > On Tue, 6 May 2014 19:43:24 +0200 > Joerg Sonnenberger <[email protected]> wrote: > > > As has been mentioned before, the (kernel) semaphore implementation > > > in -current doesn't work well. > > > > I haven't seen any such mentioning. PR? > > I didn't find a PR, but there was at least some discussion when I > added the pkgsrc Python fix, starting here: > http://mail-index.netbsd.org/current-users/2012/08/15/msg020907.html
All discussion in that sound a lot like justifying broken code. Implementing semaphores as files is explicitly allowed by the standard, especially given the arguments around sem_open. > While I don't think that it causes these problems, an obvious > deficiency is that our kernel semaphores get inherited to child > processes, while Posix says that they should be closed on exec. Where? Joerg
