On Fri, Jan 26, 2001 at 11:21:43AM +0100, Maciej W. Rozycki wrote: > Ralf, BTW, what do you think if we send a segfault on a memory access > violation instead of returning an error? That would make the behaviour of > MIPS_ATMIC_SET consistent for any memory contents. Does anything actually > rely on the function to return an error in such a situation? Afaik the only user of MIPS_ATOMIC_SET ever running on Linux/MIPS is the Linuxthreads code you wrote, so no. Aside of that the semantics of this syscall were defined by older MIPS operating systems such as Risc/OS and I think we should follow their example. Ralf
