From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <f75780241003271740t4f0dad99i13c1497b26bcf474@mail.gmail.com>
References: <f75780241003271740t4f0dad99i13c1497b26bcf474@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 27 Mar 2010 21:52:22 -0300
Message-ID: <32d987d51003271752u52f51962x2edd9912641bd96c@mail.gmail.com>
From: "Federico G. Benavento" <benavento@gmail.com>
To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Subject: Re: [9fans] Semaphores for libc Lock?
Topicbox-Message-UUID: f6186148-ead5-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025

http://plan9.bell-labs.com/magic/man2html/2/semacquire

On Sat, Mar 27, 2010 at 9:40 PM, Venkatesh Srinivas <me@acm.jhu.edu> wrote:
> Hi,
> In Russ Cox's and Sape Mullender's 2008 IWP9 paper on semaphores in Plan 9,
> they suggest that semaphore (semacquire/semrelease)-based locks in libc were
> better than the current spinning ones; they note that the locks would be
> replaced in the distribution soon.
> Is that still in the cards?
> -- vs
>



--
Federico G. Benavento