Sujet : Re: MSI interrupts
De : chris.m.thomasson.1 (at) *nospam* gmail.com (Chris M. Thomasson)
Groupes : comp.archDate : 26. Mar 2025, 00:53:51
Autres entêtes
Organisation : A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID : <vrvfmg$d24n$2@dont-email.me>
References : 1 2 3 4 5
User-Agent : Mozilla Thunderbird
On 3/25/2025 4:29 PM, Dan Cross wrote:
In article <vrvdth$d24n$1@dont-email.me>,
Chris M. Thomasson <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> wrote:
On 3/25/2025 3:21 PM, Dan Cross wrote:
In article <vrv483$3ekk$2@dont-email.me>,
Chris M. Thomasson <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> wrote:
On 3/25/2025 4:20 AM, Dan Cross wrote:
In article <vrt37r$27c13$4@dont-email.me>,
Chris M. Thomasson <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> wrote:
On 3/24/2025 1:28 PM, Dan Cross wrote:
There's no guarantee that the tail is the correct place to
insert the element, vis the order of the elements.
>
https://www.cs.rochester.edu/research/synchronization/pseudocode/queues.html
>
If you go back and review the thread, you'd see that the problem
is to remove an element from a queue, and insert it into an
ordered list. This part of the discussion is concerning the
latter operation.
>
There are lock-free ways to insert into an ordered list, indeed.
>
How is that relevant?
>
inserting into an ordered list is not relevant?
The fact that you can use a lock-free algorithm to do so seems
utterly beside the point.
So be it.
MSI interrupts
Re: MSI interrupts