From: Alexander Terekhov (terekhov_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-01-28 07:03:03
Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> | http://www.boost.org/boost/detail/lwm_gcc.hpp is also broken.
> Because of the sched_yield or something else?
Yes (plus the issue of memory barriers).
> Perhaps the lwm_gcc should just be removed?
> (and lwm_linux)
> In the lwm_linux case futexes could be used if new enough glibc and
No need for new enough glibc; only new enough kernel (one with
sensible and correct futex impl -- probably 3.2.something ;-) ),
> (OTOH in that case it is likely that pthread's mutex is
> implement with futex)
Current impl aside for a moment, pthread_mutex_t does some
dispatching because it represents multiple mutex types. A
"lightweight mutex" doesn't need really that. Well, I guess that
boost simply needs standard atomic<> template -- for something
along the lines of
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk