On 9 Nov 1999, Assar Westerlund wrote:
> Bruce Evans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > That's a really old bug. I fixed it a year or two ago in my version,
> > and optimised the !SMP case following a suggestion of tegge (waiting
> > for the lock is useless in the !SMP case).
>
> Looks fine. Can
Bruce Evans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> That's a really old bug. I fixed it a year or two ago in my version,
> and optimised the !SMP case following a suggestion of tegge (waiting
> for the lock is useless in the !SMP case).
Looks fine. Can you commit your patch?
/assar
To Unsubscribe: sen
> Why trying to debug some locking code of my own I enabled
> SIMPLELOCK_DEBUG, only to find out that I was getting lots of
> `simple_unlock: lock not held' in lockmgr -> acquire -> apause.
>
> Looking closer at `apause' it seems rather clear that it can cause
> this. I proposed simple change is
[re-sending a mail that went unanswered by -hackers]
Why trying to debug some locking code of my own I enabled
SIMPLELOCK_DEBUG, only to find out that I was getting lots of
`simple_unlock: lock not held' in lockmgr -> acquire -> apause.
Looking closer at `apause' it seems rather clear that it ca
