Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 01 Jun 2009 22:17:48 +0100
From:      Bruce Simpson <bms@FreeBSD.org>
To:        Jilles Tjoelker <jilles@stack.nl>
Cc:        Vlad Galu <dudu@dudu.ro>, freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Unnamed POSIX shared semaphores
Message-ID:  <4A24457C.6060100@FreeBSD.org>
In-Reply-To: <20090601161903.GA40377@stack.nl>
References:  <ad79ad6b0906010833y20042080td1ebe0d3bfffbdc5@mail.gmail.com> <20090601161903.GA40377@stack.nl>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Jilles Tjoelker wrote:
> If process-shared semaphores really work, then the above structure is
> not a pathological case. Effectively, sem_t is carved in stone. So
> process-private semaphores should continue to have most of their stuff
> in a separately allocated structure, to preserve flexibility.
>   

There was an inadvertent race in FreeBSD's POSIX semaphores which I 
fixed in HEAD and STABLE about 6 weeks before 7.2 was released.

I believe process-shared POSIX semaphores now work -- the Python 
'multiprocessing' regression test now runs to completion with no errors 
on both HEAD and STABLE.

cheers,
BMS



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4A24457C.6060100>