Re: robust futex patch for 2.6.14-rc3-rt13

[david singleton]

On Oct 8, 2005, at 3:52 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:

> On Sat, Oct 08, 2005 at 03:22:20PM -0700, david singleton wrote:
> > On Oct 8, 2005, at 3:14 PM, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> >
> > > On Sat, Oct 08, 2005 at 02:47:23PM -0700, david singleton wrote:
> > > > Ingo,
> > > >    here's a patch for the robust futex changes that match the
> > > > glibc/nptl changes
> > > > for robust futexes.  The kernel and glibc now both have robustness 
> > > > and
> > > > priority inheritance independent.
> > >
> > > Are you aware of the futex FUTEX_WAKE_OP addition from over a month
> > > ago?
> > > Futex command 5 is already taken, so you can't use it for the robust
> > > futex commands.
> >
> > Yes.   I merged the robust ops a while back to be compatible with
> > WAKE_OP.
> >
> > Currently, 2.6.14-rc3-rt13,  the ops are defined thusly:
> >
> > #define FUTEX_WAIT              0
> > #define FUTEX_WAKE              1
> > #define FUTEX_FD                2
> > #define FUTEX_REQUEUE           3
> > #define FUTEX_CMP_REQUEUE       4
> > #define FUTEX_WAKE_OP           5
> > #define FUTEX_WAIT_ROBUST       6
> > #define FUTEX_WAKE_ROBUST       7
> > #define FUTEX_REGISTER          8
> > #define FUTEX_DEREGISTER        9
> > #define FUTEX_RECOVER           10
>
> That's ok.
> I was judging by the glibc patch you posted this Friday:

Sorry, that was against an old tree.   The patch today was against 
2.6.14-rc3-rt13.

I've done that twice now.  I have to back up to the bleeding edge.

David


> +#define FUTEX_WAIT_ROBUST      5
> +#define FUTEX_WAKE_ROBUST      6
> +#define FUTEX_REGISTER         7
> +#define FUTEX_DEREGISTER       8
> +#define FUTEX_RECOVER          9
>
> 	Jakub

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/