<html>
<head>
<style><!--
.hmmessage P
{
margin:0px;
padding:0px
}
body.hmmessage
{
font-size: 10pt;
font-family:Verdana
}
--></style>
</head>
<body class='hmmessage'>
pthread_mutex_lock/unlock does not imply a kernel call. !<BR>
pthreads can synchronize in usermode just as well (or only almost as well?) as Tony's design.<BR>
Only upon contention is a kernel call needed, in both.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
That's not to say that everyone implements this well.<BR>
Linux does.<BR>
Win32 does.<BR>
The others I don't know.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Also Tony avoids even atomic operations often.<BR>
I'm not sure how others compare there.<BR>
I'm just referring to kernel/syscalls.<BR>
Are they really so terrible?<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
- Jay<BR><BR> <BR>> From: dragisha@m3w.org<BR>> To: hosking@cs.purdue.edu<BR>> Date: Tue, 6 Apr 2010 01:57:07 +0200<BR>> CC: m3devel@elegosoft.com<BR>> Subject: Re: [M3devel] lock performance, random thoughts<BR>> <BR>> I've used Java for one project, "GUI" app frontend for mobile phones...<BR>> What I saw first was their mixup of mutex/condition/cheese in single<BR>> root object... But, ok... offtopic there :)<BR>> <BR>> What I think is important about whole idea is it's simplicity and<BR>> (almost) obvious efficiency. It also needs nothing fancy (not today, at<BR>> least) and nothing maybe-it-works to implement. Nothing comparable to<BR>> early implementations of kernel space threading/thread suspending for<BR>> gc/...<BR>> <BR>> Any takers? :)<BR>> <BR>> <BR>> On Mon, 2010-04-05 at 19:45 -0400, Tony Hosking wrote:<BR>> > Yes, that's pretty much what modern Java implementations do.<BR>> > <BR>> > <BR>> -- <BR>> Dragiša Durić <dragisha@m3w.org><BR>> <BR> </body>
</html>