site_archiver@lists.apple.com Delivered-To: darwin-kernel@lists.apple.com On Feb 10, 2008, at 10:26 PM, Michael Smith wrote: Thanks, - Greg _______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Darwin-kernel mailing list (Darwin-kernel@lists.apple.com) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/darwin-kernel/site_archiver%40lists.a... The answer is meaningless unless you take the lock in the case where it's not already owned; this is what the 'try' functions do. If you really are just 'sniffing' the lock, call the 'try' function, and if it returns success, release the lock. But I'd think long and hard about what you think you can infer about anything just because the lock wasn't held when you tried it. (If you're just introspecting, then ignore the above caution.) Which 'try' function? The only one I was able to find was in lock_set.h (lock_try) which takes a lock_set_t, not a lck_mtx_t, and I don't know if those can somehow be used together. The only reason that I'm asking is because I was worried about having parts of the kernel wait too long if another part is taking too long to accomplish a task. Right now I think that it's alright if it does wait, so I just have it take the lock, but I was curious if this functionality existed in the kernel. This email sent to site_archiver@lists.apple.com