[threading] Switch to a native implementation of LowLevelLifoSemaphore #18559
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
monojenkins
requested review from
akoeplinger,
kg,
lambdageek,
lateralusX,
lewurm,
thaystg and
vargaz
as code owners
monojenkins
force-pushed
the
sync-pr-2098-from-runtime
branch
3 times, most recently
from
600710b to
4886e71
Compare
jaykrell
reviewed
Jan 23, 2020
jaykrell
reviewed
Jan 23, 2020
jaykrell
reviewed
Jan 23, 2020
jaykrell
reviewed
Jan 23, 2020
jaykrell
reviewed
Jan 23, 2020
monojenkins
force-pushed
the
sync-pr-2098-from-runtime
branch
from
4886e71 to
1eea698
Compare
Contributor
|
@monojenkins build failed |
1 similar comment
Contributor
|
@monojenkins build failed |
monojenkins
force-pushed
the
sync-pr-2098-from-runtime
branch
from
1eea698 to
d95b950
Compare
…aphore This change is motivated on two main fronts. The first is maintainability - the current managed implementation is difficult to understand and I worry diagnosing any potential issues would be a massive time sink. The second is performance - the current implementation appears to suffer from significant lock contention when running the TechEmpower plaintext benchmark. My hope is that the simpler, cleaner native implementation here will avoid both problems, but I don't want to merge it until we have benchmarking data. However, even if the numbers are similar, I still think it's worth merging just from a maintainability perspective. The native LifoSemaphore implementation has only ever been tested on posix-like platforms, so Windows behavior is unknown. Currently the Windows implementation of LowLevelLifoSemaphore is very different, so unless we have need for the LifoSemaphore elsewhere in the runtime this isn't a concern. Many thanks to @filipnavara for the initial implementation.
monojenkins
force-pushed
the
sync-pr-2098-from-runtime
branch
from
d95b950 to
18ef716
Compare
Contributor
|
@monojenkins build failed |
CoffeeFlux
approved these changes
Feb 12, 2020
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
3 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
!! This PR is a copy of dotnet/runtime#2098, please do not edit or review it in this repo !!
!! Merge the PR only after the original PR is merged !!
This change is motivated on two main fronts. The first is maintainability - the current managed implementation is difficult to understand and I worry diagnosing any potential issues would be a massive time sink. The second is performance - the current implementation appears to suffer from significant lock contention when running the TechEmpower plaintext benchmark. My hope is that the simpler, cleaner native implementation here will avoid both problems, but I don't want to merge it until we have benchmarking data. However, even if the numbers are similar, I still think it's worth merging just from a maintainability perspective.
The native LifoSemaphore implementation has only ever been tested on posix-like platforms, so Windows behavior is unknown. Currently the Windows implementation of LowLevelLifoSemaphore is very different, so unless we have need for the LifoSemaphore elsewhere in the runtime this isn't a concern.
Many thanks to @filipnavara for the initial implementation.