Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 15 Jan 2006 13:00:24 -0700 | From | Paul Dickson <> | Subject | Re: state terminology |
| |
On Sun, 15 Jan 2006 10:58:48 +0100, Ingo Oeser wrote:
> Hi Jan, > > On Saturday 14 January 2006 22:34, you wrote: > > Is there a specific term (other than "hang") associated with this > > situation? It's not a "dead-lock", because there is no other process > > (anymore) which could potentially up the semaphore. > > This is a simple "resource leak" (or "semaphore leak" in this case). > > Explanation follows: > > The resource semaphore is not usable by anyone anymore > and is still around. > > Its pretty much the same as a memory leak. There is no one, who > could free the memory anymore. > > The reasons for the resource not being usable anymore is > not significant for a resource leak. > > Also insignificant is the fact that the amount of semaphores > are just limited by available memory. If you repeat starting threads > doing the semaphore leak game from your example, you'll run out > of memory and thus out of semaphores. This is another sign of leakage. > > Do the above explanations sound ok?
But it's the functionality rather than the resource that's being lost. So I wouldn't consider it to be a leak.
How about "locked-out" or "lock-out"? It's akin to a locked room, with the keys left inside.
-Paul
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |