Re: [Threads-devel] More problems with condition

From: Anthony Williams (anthony_at_[hidden])
Date: 2008-04-21 08:23:12

Quoting James Talbut <James.Talbut_at_[hidden]>:

>> > One question about the spurious-wake-prevention: Is the absence of
>> > spurious wakes one of the guarantees made by the threading library
>> > proposal?
>>
>> No. In general, spurious wakes cannot be prevented. However,
>> I would like to minimize them as much as possible.
>
> Is it worth it?

If the wait() returns, then the user-supplied mutex has to be  
reacquired, but if the spurious wake can be detected internally, this  
can be avoided, potentially reducing contention on that mutex.  
However, if you can't reduce the number to zero, it might be worth  
allowing more through in order to force user code to handle it, as you  
say.

Anthony
-- 
Anthony Williams            | Just Software Solutions Ltd
Custom Software Development | http://www.justsoftwaresolutions.co.uk
Registered in England, Company Number 5478976.
Registered Office: 15 Carrallack Mews, St Just, Cornwall, TR19 7UL