On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 6:03 PM, Stefan Strasser
<strasser@uni-bremen.de> wrote:
That was clear to me, still I think, I don't know who fault is, having a reader
waiting and then being scheduled is a waste :D
I guess I'll write one my self.
I guess you can write a mutex in userspace that only "preserves order", but as long as you still want threads to be scheduled based on workload/time slices Í think you need an OS scheduler supporting shared mutexes to improve this situation.
Actually, I think you don't need OS scheduler support. Rethinking of that idiom might help. Imagine, you have tasks to be executed by a thread pool. What you get from the thread pool are the futures to the task execution. If so you only need to write a scheduler how the tasks are re-arranged in the thread-pool-queue after being enqued. It might become more difficult or even impossible to do some kind of pre-emption, e.g. what should happen if some task (with 'lower prio' or 'higher id') was enqued in the wrong order and started the execution. Now the task which should execute before was enqued. What do you do? Preempt? It might be impossible to preempt the lower-prio task. The only possibility I can imagine is to introduce explicit check points in the task itself and pause the execution when signalled and let the higher prio task run. Even if it is possible, the low prio task must free shared resources, like mutex-es, since otherwise there might happen a priority inversion or even deadlock.
In you special case you can do smth' like: Introduce 2 priority queues:
Q1 for the reading tasks
Q2 for the writing tasks
Using reader-writer-lock, you are able to execute as many reader as there are thread in the pool or only one writer. Now the logic is:
A: if Q2 is empty execute all reading tasks that are possible from Q1
B: if Q2 is !empty compare heads of Q1 and Q2. If Q1 has reader with lesser id execute all reading tasks that possible, otherwise execute a single writing task and goto point A.
This is simplified logic, since you have to ensure that no readers else are running, if you are going to execute a wirter and that no reads are scheduled if writer is pending.
That's it.
Regards,
Ovanes