I see. It provides the mutual exclusion for (SMP) applications that rely on interrupt_disable/enable locks?
I guess we can never get rid of it as long as we allow for users to call isr_disable/enable? On Fri, Jun 12, 2015 at 9:59 AM, Sebastian Huber <sebastian.hu...@embedded-brains.de> wrote: > On 12/06/15 15:56, Gedare Bloom wrote: >> >> I'm not a huge fan of the name, although cute, I want to think some >> more on an alternative, maybe Global Lock. What is the relationship of >> The Big Hammer to the Giant Lock? > > > They target different scopes. They have in common that they are locks that > nobody wants. The Giant lock is a flaw in the RTEMS implementation. The big > hammer is a flaw in the application. > > -- > Sebastian Huber, embedded brains GmbH > > Address : Dornierstr. 4, D-82178 Puchheim, Germany > Phone : +49 89 189 47 41-16 > Fax : +49 89 189 47 41-09 > E-Mail : sebastian.hu...@embedded-brains.de > PGP : Public key available on request. > > Diese Nachricht ist keine geschäftliche Mitteilung im Sinne des EHUG. > > > _______________________________________________ > devel mailing list > devel@rtems.org > http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@rtems.org http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
