From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 24645 invoked by alias); 9 Nov 2004 00:15:08 -0000 Mailing-List: contact libc-hacker-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: libc-hacker-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 24414 invoked from network); 9 Nov 2004 00:14:53 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO palrel12.hp.com) (156.153.255.237) by sourceware.org with SMTP; 9 Nov 2004 00:14:53 -0000 Received: from hplms2.hpl.hp.com (hplms2.hpl.hp.com [15.0.152.33]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by palrel12.hp.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0FDE44003CC; Mon, 8 Nov 2004 16:14:53 -0800 (PST) Received: from napali.hpl.hp.com (napali.hpl.hp.com [15.4.89.123]) by hplms2.hpl.hp.com (8.13.1/8.13.1/HPL-PA Hub) with ESMTP id iA90EpXW012653; Mon, 8 Nov 2004 16:14:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from napali.hpl.hp.com (napali [127.0.0.1]) by napali.hpl.hp.com (8.13.1/8.13.1/Debian-16) with ESMTP id iA90EpaQ023749; Mon, 8 Nov 2004 16:14:51 -0800 Received: (from davidm@localhost) by napali.hpl.hp.com (8.13.1/8.13.1/Submit) id iA90Elri023746; Mon, 8 Nov 2004 16:14:47 -0800 From: David Mosberger MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <16784.3063.544098.392894@napali.hpl.hp.com> Date: Tue, 09 Nov 2004 00:15:00 -0000 To: Roland McGrath Cc: davidm@hpl.hp.com, libc-hacker@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: second thoughts on using dl_iterate_phdr() for cache-validation In-Reply-To: <200411060232.iA62WIiI000935@magilla.sf.frob.com> References: <16780.6400.807914.542268@napali.hpl.hp.com> <200411060232.iA62WIiI000935@magilla.sf.frob.com> Reply-To: davidm@hpl.hp.com X-URL: http://www.hpl.hp.com/personal/David_Mosberger/ X-SW-Source: 2004-11/txt/msg00018.txt.bz2 >>>>> On Fri, 5 Nov 2004 18:32:18 -0800, Roland McGrath said: Roland> For platforms where it doesn't work, you can use nonblocking Roland> synchronization a la seqcount. Are you referring to the Linux kernel seqlock or something else? Thanks, --david