Deutsch English Français Italiano |
<vrt2sb$27c13$2@dont-email.me> View for Bookmarking (what is this?) Look up another Usenet article |
Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> Newsgroups: comp.arch Subject: Re: MSI interrupts Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2025 19:02:51 -0700 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 33 Message-ID: <vrt2sb$27c13$2@dont-email.me> References: <vqto79$335c6$1@dont-email.me> <pzdEP.126362$f5K3.26821@fx36.iad> <vrs9g9$pnb$2@reader1.panix.com> <vrsaro$1faj3$9@dont-email.me> <vrsefn$siu$2@reader1.panix.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Injection-Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2025 03:02:52 +0100 (CET) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="5e2174216670af0d17933d91728d06f2"; logging-data="2338851"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19QvcANIAfrfOA2gzhwVld8hx4LkMIl41E=" User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Cancel-Lock: sha1:czlAUvx42mJN901efhtvjOFSw24= Content-Language: en-US In-Reply-To: <vrsefn$siu$2@reader1.panix.com> Bytes: 2327 On 3/24/2025 1:14 PM, Dan Cross wrote: > In article <vrsaro$1faj3$9@dont-email.me>, > Chris M. Thomasson <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> wrote: >> On 3/24/2025 11:49 AM, Dan Cross wrote: >>> [snip] >>> I'm sure one could do a lockless pop using a cmp exchange, but I >>> wanted to a scenario where one would want to hold onto both >>> locks throughout the critical section for some reason. >>> I just don't see how this works in the proposed scenario. >> >> You want to hold lock A while lock B us being used? That can be tricky. > > Really? This happens all the time. Of course it can be tricky, > as concurrent programming always is, but it's incredibly normal. Locking order comes into play here. Uggg... I have seen nightmare code that was using recursion as well... It deadlocked at a certain depth, only under the right conditions. The locking order was not properly respected... > >> Well, there is a locking order. Check out this older work of mine, multex: >> >> https://groups.google.com/g/comp.lang.c++/c/sV4WC_cBb9Q/m/SkSqpSxGCAAJ >> >> Not sure if this is relevant or not. > > It doesn't appear to be; sorry. > > - Dan C. >