On Thu, Dec 06, 2001 at 08:42:05PM +0100, Daniel Phillips wrote:
> On December 6, 2001 09:02 am, Larry McVoy wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 05, 2001 at 11:56:17PM -0800, David S. Miller wrote:
> > > These lockless algorithms, instructions like CAS, DCAS, "infinite
> > > consensus number", it's all crap. You have to seperate out the access
> > > areas amongst different cpus so they don't collide, and none of these
> > > mechanisms do that.
> >
> > Err, Dave, that's *exactly* the point of the ccCluster stuff. You get
> > all that seperation for every data structure for free. Think about
> > it a bit. Aren't you going to feel a little bit stupid if you do all
> > this work, one object at a time, and someone can come along and do the
> > whole OS in one swoop? Yeah, I'm spouting crap, it isn't that easy,
> > but it is much easier than the route you are taking.
>
> What I don't get after looking at your material, is how you intend to do the
> locking. Sharing a mmap across OS instances is fine, but how do processes on
> the two different OS's avoid stepping on each other when they access the same
> file?
Exactly the same way they would if they were two processes on a traditional
SMP OS.
-- --- Larry McVoy lm at bitmover.com http://www.bitmover.com/lm - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Dec 07 2001 - 21:00:35 EST