On Wed Jun 28 10:13:03 2023 +0000, Jacek Caban wrote:
Do we really need SHARED_READ_BEGIN / SHARED_READ_END? I think that hiding a loop behind them is not great. It should be possible to achieve that with a helper function, so that client code would look like:
unsigned int lock = 0; while (server_shm_lock( &lock, &shared->seq )) { /* read shared */ }
Sure. I'd deliberately made it look like a server call, but we don't have to do that of course.