Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2007 21:40:48 +0100 From: Joerg Sonnenberger <joerg@britannica.bec.de> To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Pthread spin locks Message-ID: <20070319204048.GB24514@britannica.bec.de> In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.4.64.0703191403440.21146@sea.ntplx.net> References: <20070319175908.35326.qmail@web32911.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <Pine.GSO.4.64.0703191403440.21146@sea.ntplx.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, Mar 19, 2007 at 02:04:58PM -0400, Daniel Eischen wrote: > No, especially if the threads hold other locks. > I have no idea why POSIX added spinlocks. I don't > see why anyone would want to use them. Given that it is part of the realtime extensions, it makes sense. On those systems you generally also have policies for scheduler control like CPU affinity, which can make the starvation impossible. Joerg
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20070319204048.GB24514>