linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
To: Joel Becker <jlbec@evilplan.org>
Cc: frankeh@watson.ibm.com, matthew@hairy.beasts.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, lse-tech@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Re: futex and timeouts
Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2002 19:49:04 +1100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <E16lnOa-0005dy-00@wagner.rustcorp.com.au> (raw)
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 15 Mar 2002 06:08:29 -0000." <20020315060829.L4836@parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk>

In message <20020315060829.L4836@parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk> you write:
> On Fri, Mar 15, 2002 at 04:39:50PM +1100, Rusty Russell wrote:
> > Yep, sorry, my mistake.  I suggest make it a relative "struct timespec
> > *" (more futureproof that timeval).  It would make sense to split the
> > interface into futex_down and futex_up syuscalls, since futex_up
> > doesn't need a timeout arg, but I haven't for the moment.
> 
> 	Why waste a syscall?  The user is going to be using a library
> wrapper.  They don't have to know that futex_up() calls sys_futex(futex,
> FUTEX_UP, NULL);

My bad.  There was a mistake in the patch (ie. I didn't actually do
this).

OTOH, shades of fcntl!  Syscalls are not "wasted": one for every
fundamental operation makes *sense*.  If I were doing it with timeouts
from scratch, I'd definitely have done two syscalls.  As it is, the
"op" arg gives us a chance for more overloading in future.

Hope that clarifies,
Rusty.
--
  Anyone who quotes me in their sig is an idiot. -- Rusty Russell.

  parent reply	other threads:[~2002-03-15  8:47 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2002-03-13 18:26 futex and timeouts Hubertus Franke
2002-03-13 18:54 ` Ulrich Drepper
2002-03-14  4:15 ` Rusty Russell
2002-03-14 15:19   ` Hubertus Franke
2002-03-15  5:39     ` [PATCH] " Rusty Russell
2002-03-15  6:08       ` Joel Becker
2002-03-15  6:56         ` H. Peter Anvin
2002-03-15  8:49         ` Rusty Russell [this message]
2002-03-15 15:16         ` Hubertus Franke
2002-03-15 16:04           ` Joel Becker
2002-03-15 18:59             ` Hubertus Franke
2002-03-15 19:28               ` Joel Becker
2002-03-16  1:12                 ` [Lse-tech] " george anzinger
2002-03-18 21:35                   ` Hubertus Franke

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=E16lnOa-0005dy-00@wagner.rustcorp.com.au \
    --to=rusty@rustcorp.com.au \
    --cc=frankeh@watson.ibm.com \
    --cc=jlbec@evilplan.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=lse-tech@lists.sourceforge.net \
    --cc=matthew@hairy.beasts.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body. 
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).