Bill Tutt:

Calling Sleep(0) for a spinlock can cause a priority inversion, adding
comments to explain what's going on.
This commit is contained in:
Guido van Rossum 2000-05-11 12:53:51 +00:00
parent 65e69002a2
commit ede8c6eea1
1 changed files with 24 additions and 1 deletions

View File

@ -50,9 +50,32 @@ static PVOID WINAPI interlocked_cmp_xchg(PVOID *dest, PVOID exc, PVOID comperand
{
static LONG spinlock = 0 ;
PVOID result ;
DWORD dwSleep = 0;
/* Acqire spinlock (yielding control to other threads if cant aquire for the moment) */
while(InterlockedExchange(&spinlock, 1)) Sleep(0) ;
while(InterlockedExchange(&spinlock, 1))
{
// Using Sleep(0) can cause a priority inversion.
// Sleep(0) only yields the processor if there's
// another thread of the same priority that's
// ready to run. If a high-priority thread is
// trying to acquire the lock, which is held by
// a low-priority thread, then the low-priority
// thread may never get scheduled and hence never
// free the lock. NT attempts to avoid priority
// inversions by temporarily boosting the priority
// of low-priority runnable threads, but the problem
// can still occur if there's a medium-priority
// thread that's always runnable. If Sleep(1) is used,
// then the thread unconditionally yields the CPU. We
// only do this for the second and subsequent even
// iterations, since a millisecond is a long time to wait
// if the thread can be scheduled in again sooner
// (~100,000 instructions).
// Avoid priority inversion: 0, 1, 0, 1,...
Sleep(dwSleep);
dwSleep = !dwSleep;
}
result = *dest ;
if (result == comperand)
*dest = exc ;