| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Lines |
|---|
|
|
|
for now this is just a tiny optimization, but later if we support
cancellation from __stdio_read and __stdio_write, it will be necessary
for the recusrive lock count to be zero in order for these functions
to know they are responsible for unlocking the FILE on cancellation.
|
|
previously, stdio used spinlocks, which would be unacceptable if we
ever add support for thread priorities, and which yielded
pathologically bad performance if an application attempted to use
flockfile on a key file as a major/primary locking mechanism.
i had held off on making this change for fear that it would hurt
performance in the non-threaded case, but actually support for
recursive locking had already inflicted that cost. by having the
internal locking functions store a flag indicating whether they need
to perform unlocking, rather than using the actual recursive lock
counter, i was able to combine the conditionals at unlock time,
eliminating any additional cost, and also avoid a nasty corner case
where a huge number of calls to ftrylockfile could cause deadlock
later at the point of internal locking.
this commit also fixes some issues with usage of pthread_self
conflicting with __attribute__((const)) which resulted in crashes with
some compiler versions/optimizations, mainly in flockfile prior to
pthread_create.
|
|
these should be tweaked according to testing. offhand i know 1000 is
too low and 5000 is likely to be sufficiently high. consider trying to
add futexes to file locking, too...
|
|
don't waste time (and significant code size due to function call
overhead!) setting errno when the result of a syscall does not matter
or when it can't fail.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
