On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 11:40 PM, Selva Nair wrote:
>
>
>> But I'm open to "semaphores are cheap, we can just open/lock/release/
>> close
>> it on every call" arguments :-)
>>
>
> Very unlikely to be a drag on performance -- I think createprocess will be
> where time is spent [*].
>
> That said,
Hi,
On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 3:13 AM, Gert Doering wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 10:34:49PM -0400, Selva Nair wrote:
> > @@ -759,6 +762,8 @@ void
> > netcmd_semaphore_release (void)
> > {
> >semaphore_release (&netcmd_semaphore);
> > + /* netcmd_semaphore has max count of 1 - safe to cl
Hi,
On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 10:34:49PM -0400, Selva Nair wrote:
> @@ -759,6 +762,8 @@ void
> netcmd_semaphore_release (void)
> {
>semaphore_release (&netcmd_semaphore);
> + /* netcmd_semaphore has max count of 1 - safe to close after release */
> + semaphore_close (&netcmd_semaphore);
> }
