diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'runtime/wti.c')
-rw-r--r-- | runtime/wti.c | 30 |
1 files changed, 1 insertions, 29 deletions
diff --git a/runtime/wti.c b/runtime/wti.c index 544bffa7..f20812f8 100644 --- a/runtime/wti.c +++ b/runtime/wti.c @@ -201,15 +201,13 @@ CODESTARTobjDestruct(wti) pthread_cond_destroy(&pThis->condExitDone); pthread_mutex_destroy(&pThis->mut); - if(pThis->pszDbgHdr != NULL) - free(pThis->pszDbgHdr); + free(pThis->pszDbgHdr); ENDobjDestruct(wti) /* Standard-Constructor for the wti object */ BEGINobjConstruct(wti) /* be sure to specify the object type also in END macro! */ - pThis->bOptimizeUniProc = glbl.GetOptimizeUniProc(); pthread_cond_init(&pThis->condExitDone, NULL); pthread_mutex_init(&pThis->mut, NULL); ENDobjConstruct(wti) @@ -329,27 +327,6 @@ wtiWorkerCancelCleanup(void *arg) /* generic worker thread framework - * - * Some special comments below, so that they do not clutter the main function code: - * - * On the use of pthread_testcancel(): - * Now make sure we can get canceled - it is not specified if pthread_setcancelstate() is - * a cancellation point in itself. As we run most of the time without cancel enabled, I fear - * we may never get cancelled if we do not create a cancellation point ourselfs. - * - * On the use of pthread_yield(): - * We yield to give the other threads a chance to obtain the mutex. If we do not - * do that, this thread may very well aquire the mutex again before another thread - * has even a chance to run. The reason is that mutex operations are free to be - * implemented in the quickest possible way (and they typically are!). That is, the - * mutex lock/unlock most probably just does an atomic memory swap and does not necessarily - * schedule other threads waiting on the same mutex. That can lead to the same thread - * aquiring the mutex ever and ever again while all others are starving for it. We - * have exactly seen this behaviour when we deliberately introduced a long-running - * test action which basically did a sleep. I understand that with real actions the - * likelihood of this starvation condition is very low - but it could still happen - * and would be very hard to debug. The yield() is a sure fix, its performance overhead - * should be well accepted given the above facts. -- rgerhards, 2008-01-10 */ #pragma GCC diagnostic ignored "-Wempty-body" rsRetVal @@ -377,11 +354,6 @@ wtiWorker(wti_t *pThis) while(1) { /* loop will be broken below - need to do mutex locks */ /* process any pending thread requests */ wtpProcessThrdChanges(pWtp); - pthread_testcancel(); /* see big comment in function header */ -# if !defined(__hpux) /* pthread_yield is missing there! */ - if(pThis->bOptimizeUniProc) - pthread_yield(); /* see big comment in function header */ -# endif /* if we have a rate-limiter set for this worker pool, let's call it. Please * keep in mind that the rate-limiter may hold us for an extended period |