Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S265516AbUAIEt4 (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 Jan 2004 23:49:56 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S265602AbUAIEt4 (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 Jan 2004 23:49:56 -0500 Received: from rwcrmhc12.comcast.net ([216.148.227.85]:55990 "EHLO rwcrmhc12.comcast.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S265516AbUAIEty (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 Jan 2004 23:49:54 -0500 Message-ID: <3FFE332E.7070307@osdl.org> Date: Thu, 08 Jan 2004 20:50:54 -0800 From: Stephen Hemminger User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.5) Gecko/20031007 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: john moser CC: linux-kernel Subject: Re: spin_lock() and smp/multicall logic References: <20040109003522.F1411E4B9@sitemail.everyone.net> In-Reply-To: <20040109003522.F1411E4B9@sitemail.everyone.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 833 Lines: 28 john moser wrote: > As always, CC all replies back to me. > > I'm looking at include/linux/spinlock.h and I'm incredibly confused on something. Buggy implementation of run_once deleted > SO the two questions I'd like to address here are: > > 1) What is the purpose of spin_lock() > 2) Am I the first person to come up with this method of non-parallel execution > guarentee? You invented an unsafe version of monitor using spin-locks. Go read a on SMP operating systems. "UNIX(R) Systems for Modern Architectures: Symmetric Multiprocessing and Caching for Kernel Programmers" - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/