I\'m developing a patch for the linux kernel. I have to use several lists and I have to protect\'em against concurrent modification on a
In linux kernel in the implementation of spinlocks, e.g. http://lxr.linux.no/#linux+v2.6.18/include/asm-i386/semaphore.h#L97
I read that on a system with 1 CPU and non preemtive linux kernel (2.6.x) a spin_lock call is equivalent to an empty call, and thus implemented that way.
I recently downloaded linux source from http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v2.6/linux-2.6.34.1.tar.bz2 . I came across the below paragraph in the file called spinlocks.txt in linux-2.6.34.1\\Docum
Given the following code: ... private开发者_C百科 static SpinLock logLock = new SpinLock(false); ...
This is a lock that can be held by only one thread of execution at a time. An attempt to acquire the lock
On an SMP machine we must usespin_lock_irqsave and not spin_lock_irq from interrupt context. Why would we want to save the flags (which contain the IF)?
I\'ve written a \'server\' program that writes to shared memory, and a client program that reads from the memory. The server has different \'channels\' that it can be writing to, which are just differ
I am开发者_JAVA技巧 using the following spinlock approach: while(!hasPerformedAction()){ //wait for the user to perform the action
I always wondered what they are: every time I hear about them, images of futuristic flywheel-like devices go dancing (rolling?) through m开发者_开发问答y mind...
加载中,请稍侯......