Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2002 16:35:36 -0700 (PDT) From: Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org> To: Garrett Wollman <wollman@lcs.mit.edu> Cc: current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: additional queue macro Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0207021633110.97650-100000@InterJet.elischer.org> In-Reply-To: <200207022326.g62NQMCl093288@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, 2 Jul 2002, Garrett Wollman wrote: > <<On Tue, 2 Jul 2002 16:07:36 -0700 (PDT), Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org> said: > > > I would by the way argue that the statement "The queue macros always > > guaranteed that traversal was safe in the presence of deletions" to be > > false. Nowhere was this guaranteed, in fact the Manual page goes to > > lengths to NOT do this.. > > I'm fairly certain that this *was* documented somewhere, at some point > in time, although I can't find it in rev. 1.1 of either the > documentation or the code. Perhaps it was in a book (Stevens 2?). I would add that there is no occurance I could find in the kernel that assumes this.. (except the bad one I mentionned before in my own code) (at least it all runs fine with -1 put in that location on deletion), so I must not be alone in thinking that one shouldn't rely on it.. > > -GAWollman > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.21.0207021633110.97650-100000>