Le 13/12/11 18:57, Kelvin Chung a écrit :
Suppose I have a boost::upgrade_lock<boost::shared_mutex>.  When I want to create the boost::upgrade_to_unique_lock<boost::shared_mutex> and upgrade to exclusive locking, this blocks until all the shared lock holders leave.  However, it does not appear that there is a non-blocking version of this, unlike, say, making a boost::unique_lock<boost::shared_mutex> and passing in boost::try_to_lock.

So what should I do in order to create my own "try-upgrade" lock?  I'm trying to use it like so:

boost::upgrade_lock<boost::shared_mutex> upgradeLock(mutex);
...
if (...) {
    // Substitute for boost::upgrade_to_unique_lock<boost::shared_mutex>, but also with aspects of
    // boost::try_to_lock, basically
    my_upgrade_to_unique_lock<boost::shared_mutex> deferredWriteLock(lock);
    
    // Do stuff where it doesn't matter whether I have exclusive or not, while the readers leave
    if (!deferredWriteLock) deferredWriteLock.lock();    // Now we need exclusive
    // We have exclusive, do more stuff
}
// Back to regular upgrade_lock here


Hi,

There is a draft proposal from Howard Hinnant "Shared locking in C++" http://home.roadrunner.com/~hinnant/bloomington/shared_mutex.html that doesn't have upgrade_to_unique_lock but that allows to try to lock an upgrade_lock. Even if the interface is a little bit different I guess that the lecture will help you a lot.

If I understand you wan to lock a mutex with shared ownership until you need to have exclusive ownership and then retrieve the shard ownership again. Unfortunately I think that the current interface doesn't let you to try to move from shared to exclusive ownership without blocking, and I don't know how to move from a exclusive ownership to a shared on.

If you can block when getting exclusive ownership, you will be able to implement it with the current interface as follows (Note pseudo-code)

IUC, Howard's proposal contains all the ingredient to do it using a an initial shared_lock, trying to move to an upgrade_lock and if successful moving then to a unique_lock and last moving back to the initial shared_lock. See the example:

upgrade_mutex mut;
// ...
void foo()
{
    shared_lock<upgrade_mutex> sl(mut);
    // mut share locked here
    // ...
    // Try to convert mut from shared to upgrade ownership for 5ms
    // It can succeed if no other thread has upgrade ownership,
    //   or is blocked on exclusive ownership.
    upgrade_lock<upgrade_mutex> ul(std::move(sl), chrono::milliseconds(5));
    if (ul.owns_lock())
    {
        // mut upgrade locked here
        // This thread will still share with other threads having shared ownership here.
        // ...
        // Convert mut from upgrade to exclusive, blocking as necessary
        unique_lock<upgrade_mutex> el(std::move(ul));
        // mut exclusive locked here
        // No other threads have shared, upgrade or exclusive ownership here.
        // ...
    }  // mut.unlock()
    else
    {
        // mut still share locked here
        // ...
    }
}  // if mut is share locked, then mut.unlock_shared()

I plan to adapt it to boost as a replacement of the current Boost.Thread/Boost.Interprocess implementation, but this will take some time.

In the mean time you can create some feature requests, I will try to get them, but I really think the design must be changed globally.

Best,
Vicente