|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
clipka wrote:
> Warp schrieb:
>
>> I suppose that would work, at least assuming that a process never
>> releasing
>> a resource is not included in the definition of "deadlock".
>
> If you have a process that never releases a resource, then you're
> somewhat screwed anyway...
Not really. It could be livelock, with all else outside of the resource
locking/reservation/management subsystem being correct.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
I ordered stamps from Zazzle that read "Place Stamp Here".
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |