Sujet : Re: Futexes ain't fast
De : chris.m.thomasson.1 (at) *nospam* gmail.com (Chris M. Thomasson)
Groupes : comp.lang.c++Date : 30. Aug 2024, 21:04:36
Autres entêtes
Organisation : A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID : <vat8kk$kjrl$1@dont-email.me>
References : 1 2 3 4 5
User-Agent : Mozilla Thunderbird
On 8/30/2024 1:03 PM, Bonita Montero wrote:
Am 30.08.2024 um 21:43 schrieb Chris M. Thomasson:
On 8/30/2024 8:41 AM, Bonita Montero wrote:
Am 30.08.2024 um 15:31 schrieb jseigh:
>
They don't have to be fast, they just have to allow correct synchronization
and allow performant fast paths. ...
>
Futexes are there to make the slow past faster.
The fast path has been fast before.
>
>
No. You are wrong here.
No, you don't need a futex for the slow path.
I don't know what you even mean here. Tell me the difference between a slow path and a fast path.
Futexes ain't fast
Re: Futexes ain't fast
