From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Message-ID: <84236987873501d056dd65f8a66c37e4@hamnavoe.com>
To: 9fans@9fans.net
From: Richard Miller <9fans@hamnavoe.com>
Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2011 09:46:08 +0000
In-Reply-To: <62412e4ba21aba9b056860657c24927d@ladd.quanstro.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Subject: Re: [9fans] sleep/wakeup bug?
Topicbox-Message-UUID: b4a5512a-ead6-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025

> this means that any dynamic allocation
> of structures containing rendezvous is not possible because
> structure can be free'd before the rendezvous lock is
> dropped by the waking process.

Déjà vu all over again ...

This and other subtleties of sleep/wakeup were extensively explored
in 9fans back in Jul-Aug 2000.  Look for the subject line "i386
test-and-set problem" if you've got a strong stomach.