[concurrency-interest] spurious wakeups semantics
jmanson at cs.purdue.edu
Fri Nov 4 13:52:53 EST 2005
Alexander Terekhov wrote:
> Jeremy Manson <jmanson at cs.purdue.edu> wrote:
>>Alexander Terekhov wrote:
>>>>No one is really sure where they came from.
>>This paper gives the same implementation that David describes as broken
>>in the POSIX rationale, no?
> Uhmm, he said:
> : The POSIX rationale shows a piece of broken code and uses that to
> : justify the possibility of spurious wakeups.
> I have no idea what piece of broken code in the POSIX rationale David
> was talking about.
Okay. I was specifically thinking of the one on this page:
More information about the Concurrency-interest