[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170618194040.7a821d4b@inria.fr>
Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2017 19:40:40 +0200
From: Jens Gustedt <jens.gustedt@...ia.fr>
To: musl@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] a new lock algorithm with lock value and CS
counts in the same atomic int
On Sun, 18 Jun 2017 10:53:39 -0400 Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org> wrote:
> > A good way to catch this would be to introduce a struct for the
> > lock (out of scope of this patch, of course).
>
> I see reasons for and against that. I'm not strongly against it but
> just making a policy not to poke directly at these locks outside of
> "lock implementation" files (perhaps adding a macro or inline function
> to libc.h to do this instead?) seems like it would work just as well.
I would be in favor of having a struct. This would make reviewing this
code much easier. I also would be much in favor of inline functions or
macros to capture the fastpath of these function. In the orginal
implementation for stdatomic I had that, and it worked quite well:
just an atomic instruction for the fastpath and the function call
overhead only when there is not much to loose, performance wise.
> It was a poor choice to write the above direct a_cas to begin with, I
> think.
I am not sure that I get what you want to say. You mean you would like
to abstract that into something like a __trylock function?
Thanks
Jens
--
:: INRIA Nancy Grand Est ::: Camus ::::::: ICube/ICPS :::
:: ::::::::::::::: office Strasbourg : +33 368854536 ::
:: :::::::::::::::::::::: gsm France : +33 651400183 ::
:: ::::::::::::::: gsm international : +49 15737185122 ::
:: http://icube-icps.unistra.fr/index.php/Jens_Gustedt ::
Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
