[openbeos] Re: BLocker in disk_device_manager

  • From: "Waldemar Kornewald" <Waldemar.Kornewald@xxxxxx>
  • To: "OBOS" <openbeos@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2003 16:19:06 +0200

> "Waldemar Kornewald" <Waldemar.Kornewald@xxxxxx> wrote:
> > > Right, everything that uses C++ in the kernel should use util/
> > > kernel_cpp.h.
> > May I fix this, please? :))
> 
> Dunno, I haven't written it - but if that doesn't hurt the build, why 
> not :)

I will give it a try.

> > > BTW do we have to introduce the "B" prefix in the kernel 
> > > space?
> > BLocker will be replaced by other kernel land classes, anyway (too 
> > heavy?). 
> > No need to break the source twice.
> 
> What do you mean by "too heavy"?

Too much functionality that is not needed most of the time.
A simple Benaphore class would work in most cases. Only when you want to allow 
relocking by the same thread without aquiring the semaphore BLocker is needed.

Waldemar

Other related posts: