Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.programming > #5934

Re: About transactional memory

Show all headers | View raw

On Thu, 22 Oct 2015 01:20:09 +0100
Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> wrote:

> On 22/10/15 04:12, Ramine wrote:
> >
> > Hello,
> >
> >
> > I was thinking more and more...  
> 
> Okay, I'll run with that for now.
> 
> >
> > And now i have come to an interesting subject...
> >
> > Perhaps you will ask me a question as this:
> >
> > Amine, why have you invented your new scalable distributed
> > reader-writer mutex, and why have you not simply used transactional
> > memory like: Intel TSX or others..  
> 
> Well, no, but I do have a question for you.
> 
> This code is from Mlock.pas:
> 
> Buffer1 := AllocMem(SizeOf(TListEntry) + Alignment);
> FCount1 := PListEntry((int(Buffer1) + Alignment - 1)
>                             and not (Alignment - 1));
> 
> I am guessing that AllocMem is rather like malloc, in that it
> allocates a bunch of memory. Is AllocMem an implementation-defined
> function, or one of yours? If it's one of yours, where is the source
> code?
> 
> If it's not one of yours, what happens if it can't allocate the
> memory? Does it return some kind of failure indicator, a la malloc?
> 
> If so, why aren't you testing for that, and is all your code this
> shaky?
> 

It can be configured to either return NULL or throw run time error.
By default it throws error.

Back to comp.programming | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Re: About transactional memory Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-10-22 01:20 +0100
  Re: About transactional memory Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2015-10-22 02:44 +0200
    Re: About transactional memory Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2015-10-22 02:51 +0100
      Re: About transactional memory Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2015-10-22 04:00 +0200

csiph-web