What I mention is this : I presume that the interlocking mechanism is just to isolate a variable from being updated by another task, while the current task should do it. This has been possible since the early 8086. What I wondered is why the before mentioned instructions go through such great lengths to provide the necessary mechanisms. Jurgen cgf@redhat.com@SMTP@sources.redhat.com on 19/10/2000 18:32:09 Please respond to cygwin@sources.redhat.com@SMTP Sent by: cygwin-owner@sources.redhat.com To: cygwin@sources.redhat.com@SMTP cc: Subject: Re: cygwin on a 386? Classification: On Thu, Oct 19, 2000 at 08:36:09AM +0200, jurgen.defurne@philips.com wrote: >These instructions have their equivalent since the first 80x86. > LOCK > INC dest >> LOCK > XCHG dest,src >>Of course, these operate at most between a register and memory, not between memory and memory. Are you answering my question about whether Cygwin works on a 386? Somehow I can't figure this out from your message. You seem to be instructing me in assembly language, which wasn't what I was asking for. cgf -- Want to unsubscribe from this list? Send a message to cygwin-unsubscribe@sourceware.cygnus.com -- Want to unsubscribe from this list? Send a message to cygwin-unsubscribe@sourceware.cygnus.com