The game will only use one core at a time if compiled without SMP support. As a result, the thread that holds the mutex can safely load arena_data.arena_count (while holding the mutex, of course) and it can be sure that its value does not change until it unlocks the mutex. From what I heard, a single-threaded game running on a multi core system never takes advantage of multi-threading, what happens is that the OS keeps switching from one core to the other. It also redesigns the internal implementation of the UI and input systems, which are big steps towards supporting alternative user interfaces and key rebinding. The application thread allocates arena at the first malloc through the. The highlight of this release is weather effects. polymock is primarly targeted at high-throughput multi-threaded network applications which need to allocate. The virtual memory is logically divided into chunks (the default is 4MB, 1024 4k pages). To share memory using SharedArrayBuffer objects from one agent in the cluster to another (an agent is either the web pages main program or one of its web workers), postMessage and structured cloning is used. In order to fix that, the following guarantee might be helpful: Any store to arena_data.arena_count happens while holding the new_arena_mutex. A thread-safe bump allocation arena for bytes. The modified version in your answer does not fix the problem. The load from arena_data.arena_count happens atomically, but threads may not generally assume that the value is (still) correct.
So I am suspecting that one thread might be reading the value of arena_count just before an other thread is incrementing it, and by the time it finishes reading it, the thread that incremented it releases the new_arena_mutex and the first thread goes in creating an arena with a wrong index. This is the race condition you describe in your question: Race condition when two threads create arenas THREAD 0x7f9c3b216700 READS ARENA COUNT AT 5
Here is one of the printf statements, and one that comforts my theory that there is a race condition: THREAD 0x7f9c3b216700 READS ARENA COUNT AT 4 Re: Arena 6 and multithreading Post by drazkers » Thu 21:37 Menno wrote: Below is what ive advised during the beta in response to a question whether a single-core setup or a multi-core setup should be preferred. Return user_area((t_alloc_chunk *)current_pool->chunk, size, &arena_)
My data structure are as follow: typedef struct s_arena I'm implementing my own version of malloc, which is very similar to the glibc malloc, as in it supports multithreading by creating arenas, which is a memory area that a thread can work on without the risk of competing with another thread.
0 kommentar(er)
