5 ms·

One thing I don’t get is how blocking is implemented once you have basic mutual exclusion working? Lets say you try to take the lock, but you spin, waiting for

One thing I don’t get is how blocking is implemented once you have basic mutual exclusion working? Lets say you try to take the lock, but you spin, waiting for it. But say in your OS now you want the thread to go to sleep until it’s available.. how is actually implemented without spinning and using CPU?

chrisseaton 5y ago
The OS schedules threads that it wants to run. When you consider which thread to schedule, don't schedule a thread that is waiting for a lock that isn't free yet.
- sydthrowaway 5y ago
  Don’t you have to constantly check the status of the lock?
  - chrisseaton 5y ago
    No, because if someone wants to release an OS lock they have to tell you.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
CyberRabbi 5y ago
Google for how the Linux Futex works. In short it's done by task switching after double checking the spinlock is still held. The kernel can do such a thing without the threat of a race condition because it can ensure no other task is running that would modify the spinlock state.
secondcoming 5y ago
The kernel knows about mutexes, and so the thread waiting on the lock won't be scheduled again until the mutex has been released. Whether the lock can be acquired depends on the scheduler and how many other threads are waiting on the same lock.
toast0 5y ago
To have a thread block on a lock, you need to keep track of the fact that the thread is waiting on that lock, and then when the lock is unlocked, wake that thread (or at least one thread that's blocked on it). That could be a wait queue, or it could be keeping track of what lock (if any) a thread is blocked on and iterating all threads to see if anything is blocked (this is relatively easy to implement, but not great if you have many threads), or ???. If you're running SMP or a re-entrant kernel, you need to be careful about how you do your checks so you don't have race conditions; you don't want a thread blocked on an unlocked lock.
logicchains 5y ago
>But say in your OS now you want the thread to go to sleep until it’s available.. how is actually implemented without spinning and using CPU? If you're facing such low-latency constraints that you need a spinlock, you wouldn't want the thread to sleep, instead you'd pin the core and have the dedicated core constantly spinning. That's how it's done in HFT. You can use a fancy network card like SolarFlare with efvi_drivers to bypass the kernel completely for network IO (spin waiting on the network card). Basically you need to treat the kernel like it's a paedophile trying to molest your children, and do everything you can to stop it touching your low-latency threads.
fulafel 5y ago
Your program has to use a kernel level synchronisation primitive that supports blocking by sleeping, like a pipe, if you don't want to spin.

chrisseaton 5y ago

The OS schedules threads that it wants to run. When you consider which thread to schedule, don't schedule a thread that is waiting for a lock that isn't free yet.

sydthrowaway 5y ago
Don’t you have to constantly check the status of the lock?
- chrisseaton 5y ago
  No, because if someone wants to release an OS lock they have to tell you.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]

CyberRabbi 5y ago

Google for how the Linux Futex works. In short it's done by task switching after double checking the spinlock is still held. The kernel can do such a thing without the threat of a race condition because it can ensure no other task is running that would modify the spinlock state.

secondcoming 5y ago

The kernel knows about mutexes, and so the thread waiting on the lock won't be scheduled again until the mutex has been released. Whether the lock can be acquired depends on the scheduler and how many other threads are waiting on the same lock.

toast0 5y ago

To have a thread block on a lock, you need to keep track of the fact that the thread is waiting on that lock, and then when the lock is unlocked, wake that thread (or at least one thread that's blocked on it). That could be a wait queue, or it could be keeping track of what lock (if any) a thread is blocked on and iterating all threads to see if anything is blocked (this is relatively easy to implement, but not great if you have many threads), or ???. If you're running SMP or a re-entrant kernel, you need to be careful about how you do your checks so you don't have race conditions; you don't want a thread blocked on an unlocked lock.

logicchains 5y ago

>But say in your OS now you want the thread to go to sleep until it’s available.. how is actually implemented without spinning and using CPU? If you're facing such low-latency constraints that you need a spinlock, you wouldn't want the thread to sleep, instead you'd pin the core and have the dedicated core constantly spinning. That's how it's done in HFT. You can use a fancy network card like SolarFlare with efvi_drivers to bypass the kernel completely for network IO (spin waiting on the network card). Basically you need to treat the kernel like it's a paedophile trying to molest your children, and do everything you can to stop it touching your low-latency threads.

fulafel 5y ago

Your program has to use a kernel level synchronisation primitive that supports blocking by sleeping, like a pipe, if you don't want to spin.