on 15/05/2011 19:09 Max Laier said the following: > > I don't think we ever intended to synchronize the local teardown part, and I > believe that is the correct behavior for this API. > > This version is sufficiently close to what I have, so I am resonably sure > that > it will work for us. It seems, however, that if we move to check to after > picking up the lock anyway, the generation approach has even less impact and > I > am starting to prefer that solution. > > Andriy, is there any reason why you'd prefer your approach over the > generation > version?
No reason. And I even haven't said that I prefer it :-) I just wanted to show and explain it as apparently there was some misunderstanding about it. I think that generation count approach could even have a little bit better performance while perhaps being a tiny bit less obvious. -- Andriy Gapon _______________________________________________ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
