[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: thread safe functions
From: |
Andy Wingo |
Subject: |
Re: thread safe functions |
Date: |
Sat, 28 Aug 2010 12:20:31 -0700 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.2 (gnu/linux) |
Hi Ken,
On Sat 21 Aug 2010 17:57, Ken Raeburn <address@hidden> writes:
> On Aug 18, 2010, at 11:56, Andy Wingo wrote (quoting the manual):
>> Thus, you need to put in additional synchronizations when multiple
>> threads want to use a single hashtable, or any other mutable Scheme
>> object.
>
> Unfortunately this applies to some internals of the implementation too.
> For example, "set-object-property!" and friends use a hash table and
> assoc lists internally.
Fixed, thanks.
> scm_c_issue_deprecation_warning and scm_c_register_extension don't look
> thread-safe to me (in the sense described above).
Fixed also.
> That's just from a spot check; I'm not even trying to be thorough.
I await your more thorough check :)
> And don't get me going on memory ordering models....
I'm interested!
> To be honest, I wouldn't trust libguile in a multithreaded application
> without much more careful analysis, not just of the code, but of the
> assumptions being made and whether they're actually valid for various
> processors (not just the relatively friendly x86) and compilers.
> Without that sort of analysis, I think "use mutexes everywhere" is the
> only safe approach, and libguile certainly isn't doing that.
I think we agree, but I prefer to paint this in a more optimistic
light -- that things are mostly there, but bugs are possible. Bug fixes
are also possible :)
Cheers,
Andy
--
http://wingolog.org/