220 24 <-7447476526686364750@unknownmsgid> article Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Tony V E Newsgroups: gmane.comp.lang.c++.isocpp.proposals Subject: Re: Re: Lock free fifo, stack Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2012 06:54:26 -0000 Lines: 233 Approved: news@gmane.org Message-ID: <-7447476526686364750@unknownmsgid> References: <8ea5f6a7-f498-45a8-8baa-099fec4e5530@isocpp.org> <51f92d9d-5865-4fbf-938d-1d87aaaa68df@isocpp.org> <067243b6-0385-4fd2-b71b-52ce55c31b20@isocpp.org> Reply-To: std-proposals@isocpp.org NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=20cf3074b692ed438804ce32a7ca X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1352616868 10720 80.91.229.3 (11 Nov 2012 06:54:28 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2012 06:54:28 +0000 (UTC) To: std-proposals@isocpp.org Original-X-From: std-proposals+bncBCUZ5QWKNQIKJF75QQCRUBAV7J4US@isocpp.org Sun Nov 11 07:54:39 2012 Return-path: Envelope-to: gclcip-std-proposals@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from mail-yh0-f70.google.com ([209.85.213.70]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1TXRRG-0003fT-DY for gclcip-std-proposals@m.gmane.org; Sun, 11 Nov 2012 07:54:38 +0100 Original-Received: by mail-yh0-f70.google.com with SMTP id o21sf8987519yho.9 for ; Sat, 10 Nov 2012 22:54:28 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: by 10.224.205.65 with SMTP id fp1mr7255414qab.4.1352616868595; Sat, 10 Nov 2012 22:54:28 -0800 (PST) X-BeenThere: std-proposals@isocpp.org Original-Received: by 10.224.52.141 with SMTP id i13ls10241894qag.7.gmail; Sat, 10 Nov 2012 22:54:28 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: by 10.49.118.40 with SMTP id kj8mr23348317qeb.64.1352616868144; Sat, 10 Nov 2012 22:54:28 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: by 10.49.118.40 with SMTP id kj8mr23348316qeb.64.1352616868101; Sat, 10 Nov 2012 22:54:28 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: from mail-qa0-f51.google.com (mail-qa0-f51.google.com [209.85.216.51]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id m17si835114qct.36.2012.11.10.22.54.28 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Sat, 10 Nov 2012 22:54:28 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of tvaneerd@gmail.com designates 209.85.216.51 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.216.51; Original-Received: by mail-qa0-f51.google.com with SMTP id t11so1226517qaa.17 for ; Sat, 10 Nov 2012 22:54:28 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: by 10.224.222.137 with SMTP id ig9mr20126454qab.65.1352616867873; Sat, 10 Nov 2012 22:54:27 -0800 (PST) X-Client-ID: 746 X-Mailer: BlackBerry Email (2.1.0.1088) In-Reply-To: 067243b6-0385-4fd2-b71b-52ce55c31b20@isocpp.org X-Priority: 3 (normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Importance: Normal X-Original-Sender: tvaneerd@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of tvaneerd@gmail.com designates 209.85.216.51 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=tvaneerd@gmail.com; dkim=pass header.i=@gmail.com Precedence: list Mailing-list: list std-proposals@isocpp.org; contact std-proposals+owners@isocpp.org List-ID: X-Google-Group-Id: 399137483710 List-Post: , List-Help: , List-Archive: List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.comp.lang.c++.isocpp.proposals:24 Archived-At: --20cf3074b692ed438804ce32a7ca Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable There are also lockfree structures currently making their way into boost. Sent from my BlackBerry=AE PlayBook=99 www.blackberry.com ------------------------------ *From:* "adrien courdavault" *To:* "std-proposals@isocpp.org" *Sent:* 5 November, 2012 5:20 PM *Subject:* [std-proposals] Re: Lock free fifo, stack Yes there is a non free commercial version indead. Le lundi 5 novembre 2012 22:48:21 UTC+1, DeadMG a =E9crit : > > I believe one of the study groups is a concurrency working group, which i= s > looking at this. TBB is commercial, as well as GPL, I think. > > On Monday, November 5, 2012 9:38:38 PM UTC, adrien courdavault wrote: >> >> Thank you for the information. >> When you say the standard is looking at it, do you mean it is already >> studied by one of the groups ? >> >> I did not know about the PPL. >> However I remember having a look at Intel's TBB but I think this is GPL. >> >> Best >> >> Le lundi 5 novembre 2012 22:19:27 UTC+1, DeadMG a =E9crit : >>> >>> The Standard is certainly looking at adding it. But you can find >>> high-quality implementations in TBB and PPL. >>> >>> On Monday, November 5, 2012 8:38:37 PM UTC, adrien courdavault wrote: >>>> >>>> *Hi everyone, >>>> >>>> I work in the domain of real-time audio processing. A problem that is >>>> really common is to have a high priority thread (the audio device call= back) >>>> needing to send, receive messages or exchange data in general with oth= er >>>> thread (like the main application thread running the GUI). >>>> >>>> To do this I use Lock free FIFOs most of the time. The code I have for >>>> this is based on the publications of Herb Sutter among others. Here is= a >>>> list of interesting articles about this issue : >>>> http://globalengineer.wordpress.com/2008/10/31/lock-free-queue-article= s-on-dr-dobbs-journal/ >>>> >>>> I=92m really happy to see the new feature, it is so nice beca= use >>>> I will not have to write CompareAndSwapInt macros anymore to have port= able >>>> code between MacOS, and Windows (and soon perhaps Android, iOS =85), t= hat >>>> will clearly make my code simpler. Also I see that there is a group wo= rking >>>> hard on the transactional memory problem. And this is also important >>>> because I=92m not really good with the memory barriers issues but I ha= d to >>>> code something using non-portable API to do create a multi writer mult= i >>>> reader FIFO that is really thread safe on multi core architectures and= I >>>> hope that the SG5 will make my life easier and this implementation saf= er >>>> with more clean code. >>>> >>>> So I just wonder, why not adding lock free FIFO to the standard ? (As = I >>>> think I might not be the only one with this issue). And obviously this= idea >>>> can be extended to more containers even if I don=92t think it would be= useful >>>> for any container. >>>> >>>> In my search for existing libraries that are LGPL or other open >>>> licenses, I found this http://www.liblfds.org/, where there is such a >>>> library without any license. >>>> >>>> Would you think this would be useful to have this ? >>>> >>>> Note : >>>> I don=92t know if this is already included in any other proposal, I di= d >>>> not find this in the forum of future proposals and I don=92t think thi= s is >>>> already a part of the standard nor the SG5 papers. >>>> I=92m really sorry if I was wrong, if this already exist, could you >>>> please tell me.* >>>> >>> -- --=20 --20cf3074b692ed438804ce32a7ca Content-Type: text/html; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable There are also lockfree structures currently makin= g their way into boost.

Sent from m= y BlackBerry=AE PlayBook=99
www.bl= ackberry.com

From: "adrien courdavault" <adrien59cadri@gmail.com>
<= strong>To: "std-p= roposals@isocpp.org" <std-proposals@isocpp.org>
Sent: 5 November, 2012 5:20 PM
Subject: [std-proposals] Re: Lock free fifo, stack

Yes there is a non= free commercial version indead.

Le lundi 5 novembre 201= 2 22:48:21 UTC+1, DeadMG a =E9crit=A0:
I believe one of the study groups is a concurrency working group, which is = looking at this. TBB is commercial, as well as GPL, I think.

On Mond= ay, November 5, 2012 9:38:38 PM UTC, adrien courdavault wrote:
Thank you for the information.
When you say the standard is looking at = it, do you mean it is already studied by one of the groups ?

=
I did not know about the PPL.
However I remember havin= g a look at Intel's TBB but I think this is GPL.

Best

Le lundi 5 novembre 2012 22:19:27 UTC+1, De= adMG a =E9crit=A0:
The Standard is c= ertainly looking at adding it. But you can find high-quality implementation= s in TBB and PPL.

On Monday, November 5, 2012 8:38:37 PM UTC, adrien courdavault wrote:Hi everyone,

I work in the do= main of real-time audio processing. A problem that is really common is to h= ave a high priority thread (the audio device callback) needing to send, rec= eive messages or exchange data in general with other thread (like the main = application thread running the GUI).

To do this I use= Lock free FIFOs most of the time. The code I have for this is based on= the publications of Herb Sutter among others. Here is a list of interestin= g articles about this issue : http://global= engineer.wordpress.com/2008/10/31/lock-free-queue-articles-on-dr-dobbs-jour= nal/

I=92m really hap= py to see the new <atomic> feature, it is so nice because I will not = have to write CompareAndSwapInt macros anymore to have portable code betwee= n MacOS, and Windows (and soon perhaps Android, iOS =85), that will clearly= make my code simpler. Also I see that there is a group working hard on the= transactional memory problem. And this is also important because I=92m not= really good with the memory barriers issues but I had to code something us= ing non-portable API to do create a multi writer multi reader FIFO that is = really thread safe on multi core architectures and I hope that the SG5 will= make my life easier and this implementation safer with more clean code.

So I just wonder= , why not adding lock free FIFO to the standard ? (As I think I might not b= e the only one with this issue). And obviously this idea can be extended to= more containers even if I don=92t think it would be useful for any contain= er.

In my search for= existing libraries that are LGPL or other open licenses, I found this http://www.liblfds.org/, where there is such a library without any license.<= br>
Would you think = this would be useful to have this ?

Note : I don=92t know if this is already included in any o= ther proposal, I did not find this in the forum of future proposals and I d= on=92t think this is already a part of the standard nor the SG5 papers.
I=92m really sorry if I was wrong, if this already = exist, could you please tell me.

--
=A0
=A0
=A0

--
 
 
 
--20cf3074b692ed438804ce32a7ca-- .