>> >> Not sure what the best semantics are there, any opinions on barring >> wakeups/polling on semaphore sync_files, and just punting this >> until we need it. > > I think getting it right now will make writing sw_sync-esque (i.e. cpu) > tests easier and more complete. I just don't have any use case for it, so we would be writing code to write tests for it. That doesn't seem smart. If there is a future non-testing use case, the API is expressive enough for someone to add a flag or new sync obj to allow polling and to add support in a nice easily digestible patch. Dave.
