From owner-freebsd-arch Thu Dec 27 11:35:16 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from mass.dis.org (mass.dis.org [216.240.45.41]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2B35937B421 for ; Thu, 27 Dec 2001 11:35:05 -0800 (PST) Received: from mass.dis.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mass.dis.org (8.11.6/8.11.3) with ESMTP id fBRJh0F01276; Thu, 27 Dec 2001 11:43:00 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from msmith@mass.dis.org) Message-Id: <200112271943.fBRJh0F01276@mass.dis.org> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.1.1 10/15/1999 To: Julian Elischer Cc: Alfred Perlstein , arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: the condvar stuff. In-reply-to: Your message of "Thu, 27 Dec 2001 01:18:08 PST." Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2001 11:43:00 -0800 From: Mike Smith Sender: owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > > > Why do we need the condvar stuff? it seems very similar > > > to the existing msleep code. > > > > They're a lot easier to get right than the flags based approach > > since you don't have to roll your own. > > In other words they are like msleep. No, they are condition variables. They exist to provide a mechanism that is familiar to a large number of thread programmers, and which has a good body of related algorithms already established. They directly parallel the condition variables found in the pthread library, again keeping the kernel and userland programming metaphors as close as is practical. -- ... every activity meets with opposition, everyone who acts has his rivals and unfortunately opponents also. But not because people want to be opponents, rather because the tasks and relationships force people to take different points of view. [Dr. Fritz Todt] V I C T O R Y N O T V E N G E A N C E To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message