Pierre Peiffer wrote: > But, just for information, what is the sys_futex64 for, exactly ? Is > there a plan to have in the future a 64-bit PID ? This has nothing to do with PIDs. We need 64-bit values for more complex bit fields which can then be stored in the futex. One example is a new, much faster rwlock implementation. These are not practical without 64-bit futexes. This is why I asked Ingo to add the code. -- ➧ Ulrich Drepper ➧ Red Hat, Inc. ➧ 444 Castro St ➧ Mountain View, CA ❖
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
- References:
- [PATCH 2.6.19.1-rt15][RFC] - futex_requeue_pi implementation (requeue from futex1 to PI-futex2)
- From: Pierre Peiffer <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 2.6.19.1-rt15][RFC] - futex_requeue_pi implementation (requeue from futex1 to PI-futex2)
- From: Ingo Molnar <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 2.6.19.1-rt15][RFC] - futex_requeue_pi implementation (requeue from futex1 to PI-futex2)
- From: Pierre Peiffer <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 2.6.19.1-rt15][RFC] - futex_requeue_pi implementation (requeue from futex1 to PI-futex2)
- From: Ingo Molnar <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 2.6.19.1-rt15][RFC] - futex_requeue_pi implementation (requeue from futex1 to PI-futex2)
- From: Pierre Peiffer <[email protected]>
- [PATCH 2.6.19.1-rt15][RFC] - futex_requeue_pi implementation (requeue from futex1 to PI-futex2)
- Prev by Date: Re: [PATCH] Simplify some code to use the container_of() macro.
- Next by Date: Re: [PATCH] lock stat for -rt 2.6.20-rc2-rt2.2.lock_stat.patch
- Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH 2.6.19.1-rt15][RFC] - futex_requeue_pi implementation (requeue from futex1 to PI-futex2)
- Next by thread: [KBUILD] I don't want initramfs in 2.6.19.1 but usr/ is still processed
- Index(es):
 |