- Niuce C++14-feature - 25 Updates
| Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com>: May 25 08:35AM +0200 > Really? Should I bring up the older thread? Yes, you've got false memories. |
| Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com>: May 25 08:34AM +0200 > Why poll, when we can check the predicate then wait? Oh, boy, you're ultimately stupid. If the predicate is false you've repeatedly check it. So that's polling. |
| Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com>: May 25 08:36AM +0200 >> that lock-free programming isn't possible without polling. >> Describe me a lock-free algorithm that works without polling ! > http://fractallife247.com/test/hmac_cipher/ver_0_0_0_1?ct_hmac_cipher=27becd4634e98df52a89d06b2906ce8a7fdf24968475da63b3d57719e7eb01d4ab5f0e28d0a76c73883661af6abd0514412e774530b3af251b118a66f38c521f1bb4c5652c303411c9de7606f4690777a997ad6d65ac625c456673216ae073a067fd34e5f37010811231569824a22be1f5ab1ee525a30626b87986672f Have you ever been checked by a mental health doctor ? That has nothing to do with what we're talking about. |
| "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com>: May 24 11:37PM -0700 On 5/24/2021 11:34 PM, Bonita Montero wrote: > Oh, boy, you're ultimately stupid. > If the predicate is false you've repeatedly check it. > So that's polling. So, a condvar is polling. So what. lol. |
| "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com>: May 24 11:38PM -0700 On 5/24/2021 11:36 PM, Bonita Montero wrote: >> http://fractallife247.com/test/hmac_cipher/ver_0_0_0_1?ct_hmac_cipher=27becd4634e98df52a89d06b2906ce8a7fdf24968475da63b3d57719e7eb01d4ab5f0e28d0a76c73883661af6abd0514412e774530b3af251b118a66f38c521f1bb4c5652c303411c9de7606f4690777a997ad6d65ac625c456673216ae073a067fd34e5f37010811231569824a22be1f5ab1ee525a30626b87986672f > Have you ever been checked by a mental health doctor ? > That has nothing to do with what we're talking about. You are the one that said lock-free must use polling. Why poll when you can wait? |
| "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com>: May 24 11:38PM -0700 On 5/24/2021 11:35 PM, Bonita Montero wrote: >> Really? Should I bring up the older thread? > Yes, you've got false memories. Let me take a look now... It was in a deep thread. Hold on. |
| Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com>: May 25 08:39AM +0200 > You are the one that said lock-free must use polling. Why poll when you > can wait? Lock-free excludes the possibility to wait inside the kernel. |
| Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com>: May 25 08:40AM +0200 >> If the predicate is false you've repeatedly check it. >> So that's polling. > So, a condvar is polling. So what. lol. A condvar isn't a lock-free structure. Are you drunken ??? |
| "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com>: May 24 11:41PM -0700 On 5/24/2021 11:35 PM, Bonita Montero wrote: >> Really? Should I bring up the older thread? > Yes, you've got false memories. Iirc, Kaz told you that you are wrong in that deep thread. |
| "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com>: May 24 11:43PM -0700 On 5/24/2021 11:39 PM, Bonita Montero wrote: >> You are the one that said lock-free must use polling. Why poll when >> you can wait? > Lock-free excludes the possibility to wait inside the kernel. Why? Are you familiar with a waiting mechanism that can allow for, say, a lock-free queue, stack, ect, to wait on a kernel object? I think you are missing something, again! |
| Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com>: May 25 08:44AM +0200 >>> Really? Should I bring up the older thread? >> Yes, you've got false memories. > Iirc, Kaz told you that you are wrong in that deep thread. Maybe, but we didn't talk about mutexes with CMPXCHG vs. whatever. |
| Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com>: May 25 08:46AM +0200 > Why? Are you familiar with a waiting mechanism that can allow for, say, > a lock-free queue, stack, ect, to wait on a kernel object? I think you > are missing something, again! Ok, the simplest case is a lock-free stack. Show me the code for a lock-free stack which allows waiting inside the kernel !!! According to what you're saying you're a bloody beginner. |
| "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com>: May 24 11:49PM -0700 On 5/24/2021 11:44 PM, Bonita Montero wrote: >>> Yes, you've got false memories. >> Iirc, Kaz told you that you are wrong in that deep thread. > Maybe, but we didn't talk about mutexes with CMPXCHG vs. whatever. You wrote that mutexes can only be implemented with CAS. I had to prove you wrong. Kaz was just more blown away by your totally wrong line of thinking. He showed you his code. |
| Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com>: May 25 08:50AM +0200 > You wrote that mutexes can only be implemented with CAS. ... No. |
| "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com>: May 24 11:52PM -0700 On 5/24/2021 11:50 PM, Bonita Montero wrote: >> You wrote that mutexes can only be implemented with CAS. ... > No. YES! I remember it. Just trying to find the damn posts. I will get back to you. |
| "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com>: May 24 11:53PM -0700 On 5/24/2021 11:40 PM, Bonita Montero wrote: >> So, a condvar is polling. So what. lol. > A condvar isn't a lock-free structure. > Are you drunken ??? God you are being dense right now. |
| Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com>: May 25 08:54AM +0200 >> No. > YES! I remember it. Just trying to find the damn posts. I will get back > to you. You're right that Kaz corrected me. But you're wrong that this was related to the question whether mutexes could be nly realized via compare-and-swap. |
| Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com>: May 25 08:55AM +0200 > God you are being dense right now. Lock-free structures never wait inside the kernel, that's while the're non-locking. But a condvar mostly waits inside the kernel. |
| "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com>: May 24 11:55PM -0700 On 5/24/2021 11:46 PM, Bonita Montero wrote: > Ok, the simplest case is a lock-free stack. Show me the code > for a lock-free stack which allows waiting inside the kernel !!! > According to what you're saying you're a bloody beginner. You really want me to show you the code that allows a lock-free stack to wait? Try to think. I will give you a try. Actually, if you cannot think of anything, I will create a new thread, just for you! :^) Its 11:54 here, getting a little tired. However, you seem to make me want to say awake longer! wow. You have some powers. :^) You are making me want to bust out Relacy, and code it up from scratch! lol. |
| "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com>: May 24 11:56PM -0700 On 5/24/2021 11:54 PM, Bonita Montero wrote: > You're right that Kaz corrected me. But you're wrong that > this was related to the question whether mutexes could be > nly realized via compare-and-swap. You are the one who made Kaz correct you. I corrected you as well. |
| "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com>: May 24 11:58PM -0700 On 5/24/2021 11:55 PM, Bonita Montero wrote: >> God you are being dense right now. > Lock-free structures never wait inside the kernel, that's while > the're non-locking. But a condvar mostly waits inside the kernel. Huh? You are missing the fact that there is an algorihtm that can turn a lock-free stack into something that can wait in the kernel when it needs to for the push/pop functions. It can be a futex, but there is another one out there... |
| Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com>: May 25 08:59AM +0200 > You are the one who made Kaz correct you. I corrected you as well. But you are wrong about which topic. Sorry, but that's very weak, losing your memories so shortly. |
| Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com>: May 25 09:00AM +0200 Lock-free algorithms never wait inside the kernel. Otherwise they woudln't be lock-free. |
| "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com>: May 25 12:01AM -0700 On 5/24/2021 11:58 PM, Chris M. Thomasson wrote: > lock-free stack into something that can wait in the kernel when it needs > to for the push/pop functions. It can be a futex, but there is another > one out there... Hey! You just made me think about another algorihtm, I won't say the name to give it away. Its a fast, something... Think Bonita! |
| Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com>: May 25 09:01AM +0200 > lock-free stack into something that can wait in the kernel when it needs > to for the push/pop functions. It can be a futex, but there is another > one out there... Whatever you're thinking about - empoying kernel-facilities along with a lock-free stack makes the stack non lock-free. Lock-free algorithms never wait inside the kernel ! |
| You received this digest because you're subscribed to updates for this group. You can change your settings on the group membership page. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it send an email to comp.lang.c+++unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. |
No comments:
Post a Comment