|
Message-ID: <alpine.LNX.2.00.1408290034120.5292@monopod.intra.ispras.ru> Date: Fri, 29 Aug 2014 00:47:48 +0400 (MSK) From: Alexander Monakov <amonakov@...ras.ru> To: musl@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: sem_getvalue conformance considerations Thanks (again) to Rich for showing on IRC that that still was not correct, with at least two issues: 1. with one waiter, unwait causes an in-progress post to be lost (perhaps workaroundable by consuming the post from unwait); 2. it is invalid to update val[1] non-atomically with val[0] in sem_post, as the semaphore may be destroyed in between by a waiter that noticed the post via unwait Alexander
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.