Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.programming.threads > #4983 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Horizon68 <horizon@horizon.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2019-03-29 08:36 -0700 |
| Last post | 2019-03-29 08:36 -0700 |
| Articles | 1 — 1 participant |
Back to article view | Back to comp.programming.threads
Read again, i correct a last typo Horizon68 <horizon@horizon.com> - 2019-03-29 08:36 -0700
| From | Horizon68 <horizon@horizon.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-03-29 08:36 -0700 |
| Subject | Read again, i correct a last typo |
| Message-ID | <q7le17$3gl$17@dont-email.me> |
Hello.. Read again, i correct a last typo Here is my new invention.. I have just invented a new scalable lock that is "better" than my following scalable lock: https://sites.google.com/site/scalable68/scalable-mlock I think i will sell my new scalable lock to Embarcadero software company or such software companies. My new scalable lock is a node based Lock that is scalable, FIFO fair and starvation-free. - Discovered by Amine Moulay Ramdane - This lock is scalable - It has the same space requirement as the scalable MCS lock - Doesn't require a local "queue node" to be passed in as a parameter as is doing the MCS and CLH locks. - Spins only on local locations on a cache-coherent machine - And it's fast. So you have to know that my new scalable lock doesn't require a local "queue node" to be passed in as a parameter as is doing the MCS and CLH locks, my scalable MLock doesn't require any parameter to be passed, just call the Enter() and Leave() methods and that's all. Thank you, Amine Moulay Ramdane.
Back to top | Article view | comp.programming.threads
csiph-web