This is the mail archive of the
cygwin-patches@cygwin.com
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Re: [PATCH] new mutex implementation 2. posting
- From: Thomas Pfaff <tpfaff at gmx dot net>
- To: Robert Collins <rbcollins at cygwin dot com>
- Cc: cygwin-patches at cygwin dot com
- Date: Mon, 23 Sep 2002 14:45:37 +0200 (Westeuropäische Sommerzeit)
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] new mutex implementation 2. posting
On Sun, 22 Sep 2002, Robert Collins wrote:
> On Sat, 2002-09-21 at 01:47, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> > I haven't been following very closely. Is the reason why we are not using
> > critical sections that TryEnterCriticalSection isn't available anywhere?
> > If so, then we can probably fix that with some assembly programming.
>
> Thats a factor, yes.
>
> > Critical sections are *so* much faster than mutexes or semaphores that
> > it makes sense to use them if possible.
> >
> > Or, maybe we're talking about something else entirely...
>
> Well there are two things. Thomas's work gives use recursive and error
> checking mutexes, which aren't currently supported. He also points out
> that semaphores leverage critical sections on NT, so should be ~ in
> speed.
>
???
I said that my implementation works similar as critical sections (or Chris
mutos).
Thomas