Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2007 11:53:22 -0500 From: John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> To: Kostik Belousov <kostikbel@gmail.com> Cc: Greg Lehey <grog@freebsd.org>, cvs-src@freebsd.org, src-committers@freebsd.org, cvs-all@freebsd.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/share/man/man9 sleep.9 Message-ID: <200702271153.23179.jhb@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <20070227113338.GA30955@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua> References: <200702270251.l1R2pfaT072096@repoman.freebsd.org> <20070227113338.GA30955@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tuesday 27 February 2007 06:33, Kostik Belousov wrote: > On Tue, Feb 27, 2007 at 02:51:41AM +0000, Greg Lehey wrote: > > grog 2007-02-27 02:51:41 UTC > > > > FreeBSD src repository > > > > Modified files: > > share/man/man9 sleep.9 > > Log: > > Add warning about deadlocks created by use of wakeup_one. > > +.Fn wakeup_one > +does not work reliably if more than one process is sleeping on the same > +address; > +in this case it is possible for an unrelated process to be woken. > +This process will ignore the wakeup, and the correct process will never be > +woken. > +.Pp > > Is this a bug (that should be fixed), or some fundamental issue with > wakeup_one() ? I actually think the paragraph is unclear, because in several place where wakeup_one() is used it does indeed work fine when "more than one process (sic) is sleeping on the same address". -- John Baldwin
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200702271153.23179.jhb>