public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Howard Chu <hyc@symas.com>
To: Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au>
Cc: Lee Revell <rlrevell@joe-job.com>,
	Christopher Friesen <cfriesen@nortel.com>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	hancockr@shaw.ca
Subject: Re: pthread_mutex_unlock (was Re: sched_yield() makes OpenLDAP slow)
Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 06:24:16 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <43D8DB90.7070601@symas.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <43D88E55.7010506@yahoo.com.au>

Nick Piggin wrote:
> Howard Chu wrote:
>> But then we have to deal with you folks' bizarre notion that 
>> sched_yield() can legitimately be a no-op, which also defies the 
>> POSIX spec. Again, in SUSv3 "The /sched_yield/() function shall force 
>> the running thread to relinquish the processor until it again becomes 
>> the head of its thread list. It takes no arguments." There is no 
>> language 
>
> How many times have we been over this? What do you think the "head of
> its thread list" might mean?
>
>> here saying "sched_yield *may* do nothing at all." There are of course 
>
> There is language saying SCHED_OTHER is arbitrary, including how the
> thread list is implemented and how a task might become on the head of
> it.
>
> They obviously don't need to redefine exactly what sched_yield may do
> under each scheduling policy, do they?
>
As Dave Butenhof says so often, threading is a cooperative programming 
model, not a competitive one. The sched_yield function exists for a 
specific purpose, to let one thread decide to allow some other thread to 
run. No matter what the scheduling policy, or even if there is no 
scheduling policy at all, the expectation is that the current thread 
will not continue to run unless there are no other runnable threads in 
the same process. The other important point here is that the yielding 
thread is only cooperating with other threads in its process. The 2.6 
kernel behavior effectively causes the entire process to give up its 
time slice, since the yielding thread has to wait for other processes in 
the system before it can run again. Again, if folks wanted process 
scheduling behavior they would have used fork().

By the way, I've already raised an objection with the Open Group asking 
for more clarification here.
http://www.opengroup.org/austin/aardvark/latest/xshbug2.txt   request 
number 120.

-- 
  -- Howard Chu
  Chief Architect, Symas Corp.  http://www.symas.com
  Director, Highland Sun        http://highlandsun.com/hyc
  OpenLDAP Core Team            http://www.openldap.org/project/


  reply	other threads:[~2006-01-26 14:24 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 88+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2006-01-24 22:59 e100 oops on resume Stefan Seyfried
2006-01-24 23:21 ` Mattia Dongili
2006-01-25  9:02   ` Olaf Kirch
2006-01-25 12:11     ` Olaf Kirch
2006-01-25 13:51       ` sched_yield() makes OpenLDAP slow Howard Chu
2006-01-25 14:38         ` Robert Hancock
2006-01-25 17:49         ` Christopher Friesen
2006-01-25 18:26           ` pthread_mutex_unlock (was Re: sched_yield() makes OpenLDAP slow) Howard Chu
2006-01-25 18:59             ` Nick Piggin
2006-01-25 19:32               ` Howard Chu
2006-01-26  8:51                 ` Nick Piggin
2006-01-26 14:15                   ` Kyle Moffett
2006-01-26 14:43                     ` Howard Chu
2006-01-26 19:57                       ` David Schwartz
2006-01-26 20:27                         ` Howard Chu
2006-01-26 20:46                           ` Nick Piggin
2006-01-26 21:32                             ` Howard Chu
2006-01-26 21:41                               ` Nick Piggin
2006-01-26 21:56                                 ` Howard Chu
2006-01-26 22:24                                   ` Nick Piggin
2006-01-27  8:08                                     ` Howard Chu
2006-01-27 19:25                                       ` Philipp Matthias Hahn
2006-02-01 12:31                                       ` Nick Piggin
2006-01-27  4:27                                   ` Steven Rostedt
2006-01-26 21:58                               ` Christopher Friesen
2006-01-27  4:13                               ` Steven Rostedt
2006-01-27  2:16                           ` David Schwartz
2006-01-27  8:19                             ` Howard Chu
2006-01-27 19:50                               ` David Schwartz
2006-01-27 20:13                                 ` Howard Chu
2006-01-27 21:05                                   ` David Schwartz
2006-01-27 21:23                                     ` Howard Chu
2006-01-27 23:31                                       ` David Schwartz
2006-01-30  8:28                         ` Helge Hafting
2006-01-26 10:38                 ` Nikita Danilov
2006-01-30  8:35                   ` Helge Hafting
2006-01-30 11:13                     ` Nikita Danilov
2006-01-31 23:18                     ` David Schwartz
2006-01-25 21:06             ` Lee Revell
2006-01-25 22:14               ` Howard Chu
2006-01-26  0:16                 ` Robert Hancock
2006-01-26  0:49                   ` Howard Chu
2006-01-26  1:04                     ` Lee Revell
2006-01-26  1:31                       ` Howard Chu
2006-01-26  2:05                 ` David Schwartz
2006-01-26  2:48                   ` Mark Lord
2006-01-26  3:30                     ` David Schwartz
2006-01-26  3:49                       ` Samuel Masham
2006-01-26  4:02                         ` Samuel Masham
2006-01-26  4:53                           ` Lee Revell
2006-01-26  6:14                             ` Samuel Masham
2006-01-26  8:54                 ` Nick Piggin
2006-01-26 14:24                   ` Howard Chu [this message]
2006-01-26 14:54                     ` Nick Piggin
2006-01-26 15:23                       ` Howard Chu
2006-01-26 15:51                         ` Nick Piggin
2006-01-26 16:44                           ` Howard Chu
2006-01-26 17:34                             ` linux-os (Dick Johnson)
2006-01-26 19:00                               ` Nick Piggin
2006-01-26 19:14                                 ` linux-os (Dick Johnson)
2006-01-26 21:12                                   ` Nick Piggin
2006-01-26 21:31                                     ` linux-os (Dick Johnson)
2006-01-27  7:06                                       ` Valdis.Kletnieks
2006-01-30  8:44                               ` Helge Hafting
2006-01-30  8:50                                 ` Howard Chu
2006-01-30 15:33                                   ` Kyle Moffett
2006-01-30 13:28                                 ` linux-os (Dick Johnson)
2006-01-30 15:15                                   ` Helge Hafting
2006-01-26 10:44                 ` Nikita Danilov
2006-01-26  0:08             ` Robert Hancock
2006-01-26  1:07         ` sched_yield() makes OpenLDAP slow David Schwartz
2006-01-26  8:30           ` Helge Hafting
2006-01-26  9:01             ` Nick Piggin
2006-01-26 10:50             ` Nikita Danilov
2006-01-25 19:37       ` e100 oops on resume Jesse Brandeburg
2006-01-25 20:14         ` Olaf Kirch
2006-01-25 22:28           ` Jesse Brandeburg
2006-01-26  0:28         ` Jesse Brandeburg
2006-01-26  9:32           ` Pavel Machek
2006-01-26 19:02           ` Stefan Seyfried
2006-01-26 19:09             ` Olaf Kirch
2006-01-28 11:53             ` Mattia Dongili
2006-01-28 19:53               ` Jesse Brandeburg
2006-02-07  6:57                 ` Jeff Garzik
     [not found]           ` <BAY108-DAV111F6EF46F6682FEECCC1593140@phx.gbl>
     [not found]             ` <4807377b0601271404w6dbfcff6s4de1c3f785dded9f@mail.gmail.com>
2006-01-30 17:25               ` Can I do a regular read to simulate prefetch instruction? John Smith
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2006-01-30 22:01 pthread_mutex_unlock (was Re: sched_yield() makes OpenLDAP slow) linux
2006-01-30 23:37 linux
2006-02-01 17:06 Lee Schermerhorn

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=43D8DB90.7070601@symas.com \
    --to=hyc@symas.com \
    --cc=cfriesen@nortel.com \
    --cc=hancockr@shaw.ca \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au \
    --cc=rlrevell@joe-job.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox