Re: [boost] boost interprocess (>1.45) robust mutexes

Subject: Re: [boost] boost interprocess (>1.45) robust mutexes
From: Rusk . (ddursk_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-03-31 11:09:54

Hi Ion,

Thanks very much for your reply.

In my application I wanted to use interprocess_condition class as well -
what would I need to modify in there to cope with EOWNERDEAD errors?

Cheers,
ddrum

2011/3/29 Ion Gaztañaga <igaztanaga_at_[hidden]>

> El 29/03/2011 19:34, Rusk . escribió:
>
>  Hi,
>>
>> I have noticed that in version 1.45 Ion Gaztanaga has added
>> detail/robust_emulation.hpp which contains code that seems to emulate
>> pthread_mutexattr_setrobust_np(). I understand this may be needed for
>> platforms that don't support robust mutexes. My version of linux does seem
>> to support robust mutexes, however I could not find a way to compile or in
>> any other way to use this flag on posix mutexes in boost 1.46.1.
>>
>
> It's an experiment to emulate robust mutexes in platforms without them, but
> using this for platforms with posix process shared mutexes would have a big
> performance impact. I haven't tested this much and I have now too many
> fronts and pending updates to work on this, that's why it is in detail
> directory right now. It's experimental and it won't be stable, I'm afraid. I
> plan to continue to work on this after Boost.Move is stabilized and
> Boost.Container review passes.
>
> The idea is also to experiment a bit with different C++ implementations to
> find a correct C++ interface for robust mutexes, since POSIX semantics are
> not very easily mappable to current lock semantics.
>
> Meanwhile you can modify
>
> boost/interprocess/sync/posix/pthread_helpers.hpp
>
> and set robust mutex attribute in mutexattr_wrapper in you code.
>
> Ion
> _______________________________________________
> Unsubscribe & other changes:
> http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
>