From: Chris M. Thomasson on 24 Dec 2009 16:42 "tanix" <tanix(a)mongo.net> wrote in message news:hh0j0p$e5o$8(a)news.eternal-september.org... > In article <7854FD96-2DDB-4A81-A2D0-184F37600308(a)microsoft.com>, > =?Utf-8?B?SHVnbw==?= gleaves(a)hotmail.com> <hugh<underbar> wrote: >>First: The order in which my text appears is simply the default way the >>edit >>box presents itself to me in IE when I click "Reply", so gripe at MS for >>this. >> >>Second: A spinlock is NOT a "kernel mode mechanism" period. Yes the NT >>kernel uses spinlocks and has a small API to support them, but a spinlock >>is >>not something that one can only use or have in kernel mode, this the first >>of >>many errors you make. >> >>Read and learn somthing: >> >>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spinlock >> >>Note the sentence "In software engineering, a spinlock is a lock where the >>thread simply waits in a loop ("spins") repeatedly checking until the lock >>becomes available." > > Correct. And so it spends 100% of your processing time Have you ever heard of a backoff algorithm? > and nothing else may happen mean while. Please explain why nothing else could happen in the mean time? It kind of seems like you don't have all that much experience with synchronization algorithms in general; sorry... |