[PATCH] Bug #20116: Clarify barrier-like and mutex-like behaviours of PD->lock.
Florian Weimer
fweimer@redhat.com
Tue Feb 14 11:32:00 GMT 2017
On 02/13/2017 07:49 PM, Florian Weimer wrote:
> On 02/13/2017 02:29 PM, Carlos O'Donell wrote:
>> + It is important to point out that PD->lock is being used as a POSIX
>> + barrier and a POSIX mutex. The lock is taken in the parent to force
>> + the child to wait, and then the child releases the lock, in effect a
>> + barrier. However, this barrier-like effect is used only for
>> + synchronizing the parent and child. After startup the lock is used
>> + like a mutex to create a critical region during which a single owner
>> + modifies the thread parameters.
>
> I had missed that the lock was reused for the scheduler parameter.
>
> But the current code still does not make sense to me. Why do we need to
> keep a copy of the scheduler parameters at all? Is this just a cache to
> improve performance, similar to what we used to do for the PID?
The cache is used in the implementation of PTHREAD_PRIO_PROTECT mutexes.
There are data races:
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21160
I expect that the use of ->lock to protect these members will go away
eventually.
Thanks,
Florian
More information about the Libc-alpha
mailing list