Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!mailrus!cornell!batcomputer!rpi!rpi.edu!deven
From: deven@rpi.edu (Deven Corzine)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga
Subject: Re: Forbid() is not nice / semaphores / locking
Message-ID: <DEVEN.89May17131415@daniel.rpi.edu>
Date: 17 May 89 17:14:15 GMT
References: <8905170309.AA23406@postgres.Berkeley.EDU>
Sender: usenet@rpi.edu
Organization: RPI Public Access Workstation Lab, Troy NY
Lines: 12
In-reply-to: dillon@POSTGRES.BERKELEY.EDU's message of 17 May 89 03:09:10 GMT

In article <8905170309.AA23406@postgres.Berkeley.EDU> dillon@POSTGRES.BERKELEY.EDU (Matt Dillon) writes:

>       8 locks are available pre Lock structure (two longwords
>initially 0), where [Un]LockAddr() defaults to bit 0, and two other
>calls exist to handle the other 7.

BYTE 0, you mean?
--
shadow@[128.113.10.2]   <shadow@pawl.rpi.edu> Deven T. Corzine (518) 272-5847
shadow@[128.113.10.201] <shadow@acm.rpi.edu>  2346 15th St.    Pi-Rho America
deven@rpitsmts.bitnet   <userfxb6@rpitsmts>   Troy, NY 12180-2306  <<tionen>>
"Simple things should be simple and complex things should be possible." - A.K.