July 25, 2008 Re: Thin Locks in D | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to superdan | == Quote from superdan (super@dan.org)'s article
> Leandro Lucarella Wrote:
> > Sean Kelly, el 24 de julio a las 23:09 me escribiste:
> > > Lionello Lunesu wrote:
> > > >"Walter Bright" <newshound1@digitalmars.com> wrote in message news:g6b1ae$up4$1@digitalmars.com...
> > > >>http://bartoszmilewski.wordpress.com/2008/07/24/thin-locks-in-d/
> > > >>
> > > >>and of course on reddit:
> > > >>
> > > >>http://www.reddit.com/comments/6tbzc/thin_locks_in_d/
> > > >I remember reading somewhere that critical-sections on Windows do just that.
> > >
> > > They pretty much do. And futexes are largely the same thing in Linux.
> >
> > So, why D must reinvent the wheel, duplicating a well known technique done in most modern OS? This will only add overhead to D.
> >
> > Please, at least make it conditional only to OSs that don't provide this optimization by themselves.
> there is no reinvention. the man quotes his sources. at most there is
reimplementation. and that's unavoidable as far as i understand. thin locks must be integrated with the object model so they place that word right there and do shit with it.
Yup. I think the point is trying to avoid a cache miss from having the monitor in a separate memory block.
Sean
|
July 25, 2008 Re: Thin Locks in D | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Robert Fraser | == Quote from Robert Fraser (fraserofthenight@gmail.com)'s article
> Walter Bright Wrote:
> > superdan wrote:
> > > Walter Bright Wrote:
> > >
> > >> http://bartoszmilewski.wordpress.com/2008/07/24/thin-locks-in-d/
> > >>
> > >> and of course on reddit:
> > >>
> > >> http://www.reddit.com/comments/6tbzc/thin_locks_in_d/
> > >
> > > very cool stuff that's gonna cross the t in threads for d. i'm so very glad bartosz is on team. would he join the newsgroup, or is he a mimosa as well?
> >
> > We are very lucky to have Bartosz working with us. He's an expert on multithreaded programming, and even better, he spends a lot of time researching the latest in what others are doing so that D will build on best practices rather than reinvent mistakes.
> So, the STM stuff Bartoz was talking about at the conference... is that still slated for inclusion?
From what I hear, yes.
Sean
|
July 25, 2008 Re: Thin Locks in D | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Walter Bright | Walter Bright Wrote:
> http://bartoszmilewski.wordpress.com/2008/07/24/thin-locks-in-d/
>
> and of course on reddit:
>
> http://www.reddit.com/comments/6tbzc/thin_locks_in_d/
That's really nice. Have you run some benchmarks on this? Also, are there any plans to implement this on Tango too?
Thanks.
|
July 26, 2008 Re: Thin Locks in D | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to lurker1024 | == Quote from lurker1024 (lurker1024@mailinator.com)'s article
> Walter Bright Wrote:
> > http://bartoszmilewski.wordpress.com/2008/07/24/thin-locks-in-d/
> >
> > and of course on reddit:
> >
> > http://www.reddit.com/comments/6tbzc/thin_locks_in_d/
> That's really nice. Have you run some benchmarks on this? Also, are there any
plans to implement this on Tango too?
Not sure yet.
Sean
|
July 26, 2008 Re: Thin Locks in D | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Leandro Lucarella | On Fri, 25 Jul 2008 15:06:22 -0300, Leandro Lucarella wrote:
> superdan, el 25 de julio a las 13:17 me escribiste:
>> Leandro Lucarella Wrote:
>>
>> > Sean Kelly, el 24 de julio a las 23:09 me escribiste:
>> > > Lionello Lunesu wrote:
>> > > >"Walter Bright" <newshound1@digitalmars.com> wrote in message news:g6b1ae$up4$1@digitalmars.com...
>> > > >>http://bartoszmilewski.wordpress.com/2008/07/24/thin-locks-in-d/
>> > > >>
>> > > >>and of course on reddit:
>> > > >>
>> > > >>http://www.reddit.com/comments/6tbzc/thin_locks_in_d/
>> > > >I remember reading somewhere that critical-sections on Windows do just that.
>> > >
>> > > They pretty much do. And futexes are largely the same thing in Linux.
>> >
>> > So, why D must reinvent the wheel, duplicating a well known technique done in most modern OS? This will only add overhead to D.
>> >
>> > Please, at least make it conditional only to OSs that don't provide this optimization by themselves.
>>
>> there is no reinvention. the man quotes his sources. at most there is reimplementation. and that's unavoidable as far as i understand. thin locks must be integrated with the object model so they place that word right there and do shit with it.
>
> Then please don't add this at all! It's a little lame add overhead to all modern OS just to be a babysitter of poor ones.
I'm pretty sure that just because your OS handles multi-threading this way that your program won't just automatically inherit it. When you right your program, you have to handle all the synchronous issues yourself, otherwise all this multi-threading business would be a snap.
|
July 28, 2008 Re: Thin Locks in D | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Jesse Phillips | Jesse Phillips, el 26 de julio a las 17:27 me escribiste: > On Fri, 25 Jul 2008 15:06:22 -0300, Leandro Lucarella wrote: > > > superdan, el 25 de julio a las 13:17 me escribiste: > >> Leandro Lucarella Wrote: > >> > >> > Sean Kelly, el 24 de julio a las 23:09 me escribiste: > >> > > Lionello Lunesu wrote: > >> > > >"Walter Bright" <newshound1@digitalmars.com> wrote in message news:g6b1ae$up4$1@digitalmars.com... > >> > > >>http://bartoszmilewski.wordpress.com/2008/07/24/thin-locks-in-d/ > >> > > >> > >> > > >>and of course on reddit: > >> > > >> > >> > > >>http://www.reddit.com/comments/6tbzc/thin_locks_in_d/ > >> > > >I remember reading somewhere that critical-sections on Windows do just that. > >> > > > >> > > They pretty much do. And futexes are largely the same thing in Linux. > >> > > >> > So, why D must reinvent the wheel, duplicating a well known technique done in most modern OS? This will only add overhead to D. > >> > > >> > Please, at least make it conditional only to OSs that don't provide this optimization by themselves. > >> > >> there is no reinvention. the man quotes his sources. at most there is reimplementation. and that's unavoidable as far as i understand. thin locks must be integrated with the object model so they place that word right there and do shit with it. > > > > Then please don't add this at all! It's a little lame add overhead to all modern OS just to be a babysitter of poor ones. > > I'm pretty sure that just because your OS handles multi-threading this way that your program won't just automatically inherit it. When you right your program, you have to handle all the synchronous issues yourself, otherwise all this multi-threading business would be a snap. Parse error =) -- Leandro Lucarella (luca) | Blog colectivo: http://www.mazziblog.com.ar/blog/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- GPG Key: 5F5A8D05 (F8CD F9A7 BF00 5431 4145 104C 949E BFB6 5F5A 8D05) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- El discman vuelve locos a los controles, te lleva a cualquier lugar. Ajústense pronto los cinturones, nos vamos a estrellar. Evidentemente, no escuchaste el speech, que dio la azafata, antes de despegar. |
Copyright © 1999-2021 by the D Language Foundation