On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 04:39:09PM +0300, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
> There's no mention on what T1 is. I believe it's supposed to be Tin, in
> the terminology used in the graph.
Yes, I changed the naming after I originally wrote it, and missed a
couple spots. T1 should be Tin.
> I don't see how there can be a ww-dependency between T0 and Tin. There
> can't be a rw-conflict because Tin is read-only, so surely there can't
> be a ww-conflict either?
Yes, it can only be a wr-conflict. Good catch.
Dan
--
Dan R. K. Ports MIT CSAIL http://drkp.net/
