Re: rw_lock

On 2008-07-07 at 20:45:14 [+0200], Axel D=F6rfler <[email protected]> =

wrote:
> =

> does anyone mind if I change our rw_lock implementation to something
> BFS uses?
> Unlike our current implementation, it allows to nest write locks (and
> read locks after you hold a write lock)? It would only need another
> int32 for the owner count.

That's OK. Just don't mess it up. ;-)

BTW, I intended to add a rw_lock_demote_to_read_lock() so that one can =

seamlessly switch from a write lock to a read lock. I guess that's not =

really required after your changes (since one could simply get an =

additional read lock and then drop the write lock), but in case you like =

it, feel free to add it, too.

CU, Ingo

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sponsored by: SourceForge.net Community Choice Awards: VOTE NOW!
Studies have shown that voting for your favorite open source project,
along with a healthy diet, reduces your potential for chronic lameness
and boredom. Vote Now at http://www.sourceforge.net/community/cca08