Boost logo

Boost :

From: williamkempf_at_[hidden]
Date: 2001-10-29 15:10:54

--- In boost_at_y..., "Peter Dimov" <pdimov_at_m...> wrote:
> From: <williamkempf_at_h...>
> > > First the failed tests - I've checked and
pthread_cond_timedwait is
> > > returning zero, even though the condition variable is never
> > signalled. The
> > > trouble is if I've read the docs correctly
> > can
> > > return zero any time it wants to (a spurious wakeup). In effect
> > the client
> > > would end up polling the condition until it becomes true.
> >
> > True in theory, but in practice this shouldn't really happen.
> > Implementations should strive to eliminate all spurious wakeups.
> It is my understanding that eliminating (as opposed to minimizing)
> wakeups is rarely feasible.

Poor wording on my part. I said "strive" hoping to indicate that not
all spurious wakeups could be eliminated. They are allowed for a
reason. However, they should be a very infrequent occurrence.

Bill Kempf

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at