Deutsch English Français Italiano |
<vd4800$arc8$1@dont-email.me> View for Bookmarking (what is this?) Look up another Usenet article |
Path: news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++ Subject: Re: Futexes ain't fast Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2024 11:09:03 -0700 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 20 Message-ID: <vd4800$arc8$1@dont-email.me> References: <van414$3fe9t$1@raubtier-asyl.eternal-september.org> <vashj8$gpjk$1@dont-email.me> <vasp6h$i41a$1@raubtier-asyl.eternal-september.org> <vat7db$k5je$6@dont-email.me> <vat8i6$kjk5$1@raubtier-asyl.eternal-september.org> <vat8kk$kjrl$1@dont-email.me> <vd427l$8io1$1@raubtier-asyl.eternal-september.org> <vd46af$93f5$1@dont-email.me> <vd46gr$ajf8$1@raubtier-asyl.eternal-september.org> <vd46q6$93f5$3@dont-email.me> <vd475a$ampp$1@raubtier-asyl.eternal-september.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Injection-Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2024 20:09:04 +0200 (CEST) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="70a24908b7fe7d4940831be9570b7dea"; logging-data="355720"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+oW2I4Y9SyVfBvEiUIL7YasEEYBWt9sKo=" User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Cancel-Lock: sha1:zt6OYR/au28une0mnnUF+MPVwZw= Content-Language: en-US In-Reply-To: <vd475a$ampp$1@raubtier-asyl.eternal-september.org> On 9/26/2024 10:54 AM, Bonita Montero wrote: > Am 26.09.2024 um 19:48 schrieb Chris M. Thomasson: > >> On 9/26/2024 10:44 AM, Bonita Montero wrote: > >>> Adaptive mutexes often don't make any sense. The locking-frequency has >>> to be high and the locked-interval needs to be very short to make spin- >>> ning likely to succeed. That's both not often. > >> Adaptive mutexes with the right spin counts do make a difference! > > Only under the rare circumstances I've shown. > >> I just showed you one use of try_lock. This is just one out of many. >> try_lock is useful. > > No one needs try_lock. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Yawn...