[concurrency-interest] spurious wakeups semantics

Jeremy Manson 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.
>>>
>>>
>>>http://citeseer.ist.psu.edu/birrell87synchronization.html
>>>
>>
>>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:

http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/functions/pthread_cond_signal.html

					Jeremy


More information about the Concurrency-interest mailing list