http://groups.google.com/group/comp.programming.threads?hl=en
comp.programming.threads@googlegroups.com
Today's topics:
* Strong thread safety and lock free? - 5 messages, 3 authors
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.programming.threads/t/ea65e0404880396f?hl=en
* C++Framework - C++ multi-platform memory-model solution, with Java
orientation - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.programming.threads/t/344086e52caa9171?hl=en
* Programming With Posix Threads book - 1 messages, 1 author
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.programming.threads/t/05208d3770bd543e?hl=en
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Strong thread safety and lock free?
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.programming.threads/t/ea65e0404880396f?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 5 ==
Date: Sat, Jul 25 2009 12:12 pm
From: Marcel Müller
Hi,
I am seeking for a lock free solution for strongly thread safe reference
counted pointers. Is this possible at all?
The problem is that I have to dereference the pointer and increment the
reference counter atomically. And I have absolutely no idea how to avoid
to write memory that is no longer used by the reference counter.
Any ideas?
Marcel
== 2 of 5 ==
Date: Sun, Jul 26 2009 2:12 pm
From: "Dmitriy V'jukov"
On 25 июл, 23:12, Marcel Müller <news.5.ma...@spamgourmet.org> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am seeking for a lock free solution for strongly thread safe reference
> counted pointers. Is this possible at all?
>
> The problem is that I have to dereference the pointer and increment the
> reference counter atomically. And I have absolutely no idea how to avoid
> to write memory that is no longer used by the reference counter.
This is exactly what you looking for (download atomic-ptr-plus
package):
http://sourceforge.net/projects/atomic-ptr-plus/files/
--
Dmitriy V'yukov
== 3 of 5 ==
Date: Sun, Jul 26 2009 6:17 pm
From: "Chris M. Thomasson"
"Dmitriy V'jukov" <dvyukov@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:0c692331-5bcc-4639-aa50-e27c0581ae3e@c14g2000yqm.googlegroups.com...
On 25 июл, 23:12, Marcel Müller <news.5.ma...@spamgourmet.org> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I am seeking for a lock free solution for strongly thread safe reference
> > counted pointers. Is this possible at all?
> >
> > The problem is that I have to dereference the pointer and increment the
> > reference counter atomically. And I have absolutely no idea how to avoid
> > to write memory that is no longer used by the reference counter.
> This is exactly what you looking for (download atomic-ptr-plus
> package):
> http://sourceforge.net/projects/atomic-ptr-plus/files/
Right. FWIW, here is an alternative "mostly lock-free" implementation:
http://webpages.charter.net/appcore/vzoom/refcount
;^)
== 4 of 5 ==
Date: Sun, Jul 26 2009 7:47 pm
From: "Chris M. Thomasson"
"Dmitriy V'jukov" <dvyukov@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:0c692331-5bcc-4639-aa50-e27c0581ae3e@c14g2000yqm.googlegroups.com...
On 25 июл, 23:12, Marcel Müller <news.5.ma...@spamgourmet.org> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I am seeking for a lock free solution for strongly thread safe reference
>> counted pointers. Is this possible at all?
>>
>> The problem is that I have to dereference the pointer and increment the
>> reference counter atomically. And I have absolutely no idea how to avoid
>> to write memory that is no longer used by the reference counter.
> This is exactly what you looking for (download atomic-ptr-plus
> package):
> http://sourceforge.net/projects/atomic-ptr-plus/files
I feel the need to point out that some yahoos from Sun Microsystems are
attempting to patent Joe Seighs atomic-ptr invention. I cannot seem to find
the relevant post on Goolge Groups right now. Humm, it seems as if Google
trimmed the number of stores posts down rather significantly. I am having a
hard time finding posts from the past. Oh well. ;^(...
== 5 of 5 ==
Date: Sun, Jul 26 2009 7:51 pm
From: "Chris M. Thomasson"
"Chris M. Thomasson" <no@spam.invalid> wrote in message
news:h4j4fs$2ohn$1@news.ett.com.ua...
> "Dmitriy V'jukov" <dvyukov@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:0c692331-5bcc-4639-aa50-e27c0581ae3e@c14g2000yqm.googlegroups.com...
> On 25 июл, 23:12, Marcel Müller <news.5.ma...@spamgourmet.org> wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I am seeking for a lock free solution for strongly thread safe reference
>>> counted pointers. Is this possible at all?
>>>
>>> The problem is that I have to dereference the pointer and increment the
>>> reference counter atomically. And I have absolutely no idea how to avoid
>>> to write memory that is no longer used by the reference counter.
>
>> This is exactly what you looking for (download atomic-ptr-plus
>> package):
>> http://sourceforge.net/projects/atomic-ptr-plus/files
>
> I feel the need to point out that some yahoos from Sun Microsystems are
> attempting to patent Joe Seighs atomic-ptr invention. I cannot seem to
> find the relevant post on Goolge Groups right now. Humm, it seems as if
> Google trimmed the number of stores posts down rather significantly. I am
> having a hard time finding posts from the past. Oh well. ;^(...
I found the patent application:
This is NOT an invention from Sun. It was invented by Joe Seigh; here is
prior art in which the basis of the very neat atomic-ptr algorithm was
formed:
http://www.google.com/patents/about?id=DSIeAAAAEBAJ&dq=5,295,262
==============================================================================
TOPIC: C++Framework - C++ multi-platform memory-model solution, with Java
orientation
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.programming.threads/t/344086e52caa9171?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Sun, Jul 26 2009 6:14 pm
From: "Chris M. Thomasson"
"MoranTza" <MoranTza@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:0ead0422-0996-4877-9a38-11cd153f7403@g31g2000yqc.googlegroups.com...
> C++ multi-platform memory-model solution, with Java orientation.
> You can use all the concurrent concepts laid down by Java-memory-
> model.
> The idea is smooth transition from Java concurrent programming to C++
> concurrent programming.
> New Version: 1.4 - High Performance Hazard-Pointer:
[...]
I have not looked at your code yet, however, I was wondering exactly what
you mean by "High Performance" hazard pointer. Do you imply that your
implementation does not need the nasty `#StoreLoad' memory barrier? Check
this excellent SMR implementation out:
http://atomic-ptr-plus.sourceforge.net/design.html
Joe Seigh gets around the `#StoreLoad' by running deferred objects through
two RCU grace periods. I am very interested in how you can claim
high-performance wrt SMR. Also, FWIW, there are patent issues wrt SMR...
==============================================================================
TOPIC: Programming With Posix Threads book
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.programming.threads/t/05208d3770bd543e?hl=en
==============================================================================
== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Sun, Jul 26 2009 6:49 am
From: Antoninus Twink
On 23 Jul 2009 at 22:07, Guido Ostkamp wrote:
> While I found the contents very useful and I am not aware of any
> better book, it turned out to be rather expensive considering the fact
> that it has only 400 pages and is delivered as paperback edition (here
> in Germany it is sold for ~50-67 Euro, this is about ~70-94 US $).
What a depressing post!
You consider it the best book on the subject, but you resent paying for
it because it is "only" 400 pages! This is exactly the warped world-view
that publishers in this area have been trying to build up, that the
correct metrics for deciding whether to buy a book are pages of length,
inches of thickness, and ounces of weight - and more is better.
This is such obvious bullshit that it's hardly worth refuting it. I'm
sure it's great for the manufacturers of bookcases, but in these days of
information overload, concision and focus will eventually win out as
desriable goals in technical writing.
Truth is, anyone can write a long book, but very few people can write a
good book.
==============================================================================
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "comp.programming.threads"
group.
To post to this group, visit http://groups.google.com/group/comp.programming.threads?hl=en
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to comp.programming.threads+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
To change the way you get mail from this group, visit:
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.programming.threads/subscribe?hl=en
To report abuse, send email explaining the problem to abuse@googlegroups.com
==============================================================================
Google Groups: http://groups.google.com/?hl=en
No comments:
Post a Comment