[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: ✘64-bit time_t on glibc 2.34 and up
From: |
Hal Murray |
Subject: |
Re: ✘64-bit time_t on glibc 2.34 and up |
Date: |
Fri, 13 Jan 2023 13:06:28 -0800 |
If we make any changes to SHM, we should switch to a setup where the memory is
read only. The idea is to allow multiple readers.
The trick to implementing that is to have 2 counters.
X and Y are initialized to the same value.
The writer bumps X, updates the data, then bumps Y.
The reader grabs Y, grabs the data, then grabs X.
If X and Y are the same the data is valid. If not, try again.
--
These are my opinions. I hate spam.
- Re: ✘64-bit time_t on glibc 2.34 and up, (continued)
- Re: ✘64-bit time_t on glibc 2.34 and up, Gary E. Miller, 2023/01/14
- Re: ✘64-bit time_t on glibc 2.34 and up, Gary E. Miller, 2023/01/13
- Re: ✘64-bit time_t on glibc 2.34 and up, Greg Troxel, 2023/01/14
- Re: ✘64-bit time_t on glibc 2.34 and up, Gary E. Miller, 2023/01/14
- Re: ✘64-bit time_t on glibc 2.34 and up, Greg Troxel, 2023/01/15
- Re: ✘64-bit time_t on glibc 2.34 and up, Gary E. Miller, 2023/01/15
My ignorance was Re: ✘64-bit time_t on glibc 2.34 and up, James Browning, 2023/01/13
Re: ✘64-bit time_t on glibc 2.34 and up, Richard Laager, 2023/01/13
Message not available
Re: ✘64-bit time_t on glibc 2.34 and up, Hal Murray, 2023/01/13