Path: csiph.com!x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net!usenet.pasdenom.info!weretis.net!feeder4.news.weretis.net!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Alexander Terekhov <terekhov@web.de>
Newsgroups: comp.programming.threads
Subject: Re: can pthread_mutex_trylock() give up the timeslice?
Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2011 13:53:48 +0200
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 20
Message-ID: <4E99744C.36B91DCA@web.de>
References: <996e61f0-62c3-4960-9f1f-3926af713c34@b41g2000yqd.googlegroups.com> <0e75e91b-526a-48d3-900c-f5a9a4315e4e@b41g2000yqd.googlegroups.com> <b5165308-724e-404d-9859-dcbdd8c8fe24@l10g2000pra.googlegroups.com>
Reply-To: terekhov@web.de
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Info: mx04.eternal-september.org; posting-host="MCbSEzW5qwGLFMNXJh39IQ"; logging-data="11984"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+syWEAAw4IdYr7WLf6xNYABXVx5oa8zaM="
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
Cancel-Lock: sha1:QG9wjUrmKE4oNoOGyyFCvAGIJ0Y=
Xref: x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net comp.programming.threads:636


Brendon wrote:
[...]
> My plan now will be just to go along and do the work using a try-lock
> (not a huge change) if it shows some issues then look at another
> solution. I just wanted to ask and see if anyone here has heard of
> pthread_mutex_trylock() prematurely giving up a timeslice and so far

Realtime aside, implementations of pthread_mutex_trylock() are allowed
to give up a time slice.

If you really think that that is a problem for your code then use C/C++
atomics to implement your own mutex with trylock() not giving up a
timeslice:

http://lists.boost.org/Archives/boost/2004/05/65435.php
(auto_reset_event is a binary semaphore in posix speak)

regards,
alexander.