On 2002-07-12 07:45 +0000, Bosko Milekic wrote: > The jist of the problem is that when you want to say, remove yourself > from the list, you have to: > > 1) your "next"'s back pointer to your "back" pointer > 2) your "Prev"'s next pointer to your "next" pointer > > So that's two operations but for all you know your "next" or your > "back" may be doing the same thing to you at the same time. As far as > I know, you can't (intuitively) figure out a way to do both of these > atomically. i.e., maybe you'll set your next's back pointer to whatever > you have in `back' but then your `back' guy will set your back pointer > to whatever he has in `back' and then your next guy's back pointer will > be invalid, for example. > > So I guess that what we're dealing with isn't really a > "monodirectional" ring. Right?
No it isn't. It looks more like the "dining philosophers" problem. But that problem's solution would require at least one mutex for every part of the ring :-( To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message
