[lkml]   [2005]   [Aug]   [20]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: sched_yield() makes OpenLDAP slow
On Sat, 2005-08-20 at 11:38 -0700, Howard Chu wrote:
> But I also found that I needed to add a new
> yield(), to work around yet another unexpected issue on this system -
> we have a number of threads waiting on a condition variable, and the
> thread holding the mutex signals the var, unlocks the mutex, and then
> immediately relocks it. The expectation here is that upon unlocking
> the mutex, the calling thread would block while some waiting thread
> (that just got signaled) would get to run. In fact what happened is
> that the calling thread unlocked and relocked the mutex without
> allowing any of the waiting threads to run. In this case the only
> solution was to insert a yield() after the mutex_unlock().

That's exactly the behavior I would expect. Why would you expect
unlocking a mutex to cause a reschedule, if the calling thread still has
timeslice left?


To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-08-20 22:59    [W:0.135 / U:1.616 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site