El Tue, May 22, 2007 at 09:59:01AM -0700 Arjan van de Ven ha dit:
more buggy than with the use of a semaphore?
as far as i understand only the thread that locked the mutex can
unlock it (as opposed to semaphores, which can be released by any
thread/process). obviously this doesn't make the code be more
correct. what i don't know is how the kernel behaves when
trying to unlock a mutex the thread doesn't own. another and possibly
more important problem of the code is that in case of being
interrupted by a signal the data that should be protected by the
mutex/semaphore can be accessed/changed by two threads at the same
time.
would the following resolve the problem?
if(mutex_lock_interruptible(&info->write_mtx))
return -ERESTARTSYS
thanks for your comments
--
Matthias Kaehlcke
Linux Application Developer
Barcelona
Nothing is more despicable than respect based on fear
(Albert Camus)
.''`.
using free software / Debian GNU/Linux | http://debian.org : :' :
`. `'`
gpg --keyserver pgp.mit.edu --recv-keys 47D8E5D4 `-
-