[boost] Re: lightweight mutex for MacOS

From: Russell Hind (rhind_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-01-29 11:48:51

And the lwm_win32 is just a spinlock.  Isn't it something like (haven't 
looked at the code in a while)

while (InterlockedExchange(...))
{
     Sleep(1);
}

?

Thanks

Russell

Martin Taylor wrote:

> 
> On 29 Jan 2004, at 14:28, Alexander Terekhov wrote:
> 
>>
>> Howard Hinnant wrote:
>> [...]
>>
>>> Alexander, I have no doubt that you will see problems with this
>>> implementation, and I appreciate your comments.
>>
>>
>> Get rid of yield. With yield you basically have a spinlock, not a
>> general purpose mutex. Think of a uniprocessor [under priority
>> scheduling rules] with some higher priority thread contending for
>> a lock currently owned by some lower priority thread.
> 
> 
> I thought that the lightweight_mutex didn't have to be a general purpose 
> mutex - in fact it explictily says just that in the comments of 
> lightweight_mutex.hpp:
> 
> //  boost::detail::lightweight_mutex meets a subset of the Mutex concept
> //  requirements: 
> http://www.boost.org/libs/thread/doc/mutex_concept.html#Mutex
> ...
> //  * Not a general purpose mutex, use boost::mutex, CRITICAL_SECTION or
> //    pthread_mutex instead.
> ...
> //  The current implementation can use a pthread_mutex, a CRITICAL_SECTION,
> //  or a platform-specific spinlock.
> 
> Regards,
> Martin
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Unsubscribe & other changes: 
> http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
>