Quoting Dwight Engen (dwight.en...@oracle.com):
> On Fri, 24 May 2013 08:09:21 -0500
> > -sem_t *lxc_newlock(const char *name)
> > +struct lxc_lock *lxc_newlock(const char *lxcpath, const char *name)
> > {
> > - char *lname;
> > - sem_t *lock;
> > + struct lxc_lock *l;
> > + int ret = pthr
Oh, but OTOH, making two of the lock functions member functions
of the container struct encourages applications to use them -
which we may not want.
--
Try New Relic Now & We'll Send You this Cool Shirt
New Relic is the on
Quoting Dwight Engen (dwight.en...@oracle.com):
> I think the names you've got are fine (don't really have a better
> idea), I do think its good to name locks by what they cover. Its a bit
> tricky here because one is a process (and thread) lock and the other
> is just a thread lock and it would be
On Fri, 24 May 2013 10:40:30 -0500
Serge Hallyn wrote:
> Quoting Dwight Engen (dwight.en...@oracle.com):
> > On Fri, 24 May 2013 08:23:57 -0500
> > Serge Hallyn wrote:
> >
> > > Quoting Serge Hallyn (serge.hal...@ubuntu.com):
> > > > The problem: if a task is killed while holding a posix
> > >
On Fri, 24 May 2013 08:09:21 -0500
Serge Hallyn wrote:
> The problem: if a task is killed while holding a posix semaphore,
> there appears to be no way to have the semaphore be reliably
> autmoatically released. The only trick which seemed promising
> is to store the pid of the lock holder in so
Quoting Dwight Engen (dwight.en...@oracle.com):
> On Fri, 24 May 2013 08:23:57 -0500
> Serge Hallyn wrote:
>
> > Quoting Serge Hallyn (serge.hal...@ubuntu.com):
> > > The problem: if a task is killed while holding a posix semaphore,
> > > there appears to be no way to have the semaphore be reliab
On Fri, 24 May 2013 08:23:57 -0500
Serge Hallyn wrote:
> Quoting Serge Hallyn (serge.hal...@ubuntu.com):
> > The problem: if a task is killed while holding a posix semaphore,
> > there appears to be no way to have the semaphore be reliably
> > autmoatically released. The only trick which seemed
Quoting Serge Hallyn (serge.hal...@ubuntu.com):
> The problem: if a task is killed while holding a posix semaphore,
> there appears to be no way to have the semaphore be reliably
> autmoatically released. The only trick which seemed promising
> is to store the pid of the lock holder in some file a
The problem: if a task is killed while holding a posix semaphore,
there appears to be no way to have the semaphore be reliably
autmoatically released. The only trick which seemed promising
is to store the pid of the lock holder in some file and have
later lock seekers check whether that task has d
