On 2/15/06, Andi Kleen <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Wednesday 15 February 2006 20:49, Christopher Friesen wrote:
>
> > The goal is for the kernel to unlock the mutex, but the next task to
> > aquire it gets some special notification that the status is unknown. At
> > that point the task can either validate/clean up the data and reset the
> > mutex to clean (if it can) or it can give up the mutex and pass it on to
> > some other task that does know how to validate/clean up.
>
> The "send signal when any mapper dies" proposal would do that. The other process
> could catch the signal and do something with it.
>
That would be a new signal such as SIG_FUTEXDIED, would it?
--
Greetz, Antonio Vargas aka winden of network
http://wind.codepixel.com/
[email protected]
[email protected]
Every day, every year
you have to work
you have to study
you have to scene.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
