Re: [boost] win32 mutex and condition variable algorithms

From: Anthony Williams (anthony_w.geo_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-09-20 05:43:32

Alexander Terekhov <terekhov_at_[hidden]> writes:

> Anthony Williams wrote:
> [...]
>> He claims that the second A: lock takes the slow path, when it could have
>> taken the fast path because the lock is free. I disagree. The lock is NOT
>> free, since B is waiting on it. If A can take the fast path here, that's
>> opening the door for B to be starved. 
>
> That's not a problem as long what we need is efficient low level 
> exclusive lock. If starvation is a problem, one can solve it with 
> custom scheduling monitor on top of "grab if you can" low level 
> exclusive lock without handoff. Low level, all pigs are equal. ;-)

So let them compete equally. If A doesn't wait on the semaphore, it has an
unfair advantage.

Anthony
-- 
Anthony Williams
Software Developer
Just Software Solutions Ltd
http://www.justsoftwaresolutions.co.uk