Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2000 15:14:41 -0700 From: Jason Evans <jasone@canonware.com> To: Luoqi Chen <luoqi@watermarkgroup.com> Cc: smp@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: SMP meeting summary Message-ID: <20000626151441.L8965@blitz.canonware.com> In-Reply-To: <20000626144957.J8965@blitz.canonware.com>; from jasone@canonware.com on Mon, Jun 26, 2000 at 02:49:57PM -0700 References: <200006262013.e5QKDOP09679@lor.watermarkgroup.com> <20000626144957.J8965@blitz.canonware.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, Jun 26, 2000 at 02:49:57PM -0700, Jason Evans wrote: > On Mon, Jun 26, 2000 at 04:13:24PM -0400, Luoqi Chen wrote: > > > Processes that block on a mutex are granted the lock in FIFO order, rather > > > than priority order. In order to avoid priority inversion, the mutex wait > > > queue implements priority lending. > > > > > Ok. I remember I have read somewhere that solaris 7 has given up the behavior > > of waking up only one thread after a mutex is released, now it wakes up all > > the blocking threads. It seems that the "thundering herd" problem is not > > serious after all if the lock granuity is high enough. > > I don't think this is the case. Whoops. The article is broken into two web pages, and the second page states exactly what you said: as of Solaris 7, all waiting threads are woken up. Jason To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20000626151441.L8965>