220 32081 article Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Patrice Roy Newsgroups: gmane.comp.lang.c++.isocpp.proposals Subject: Re: Add support for setting priority ceiling and/or priority inheritance on std::mutex Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2017 19:01:39 -0400 Lines: 141 Approved: news@gmane.org Message-ID: References: <41dc3025-be7f-4c6a-a61c-c21386f59169@isocpp.org> <626cb97c-0eb4-3194-30e8-89245de2dc60@wanadoo.fr> Reply-To: std-proposals@isocpp.org NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a114e248216a958054cec13dd X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1491951700 19727 195.159.176.226 (11 Apr 2017 23:01:40 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2017 23:01:40 +0000 (UTC) To: std-proposals@isocpp.org Original-X-From: std-proposals+bncBDSZXMHWZIKBBVGAWXDQKGQECST2WYQ@isocpp.org Wed Apr 12 01:01:35 2017 Return-path: Envelope-to: gclcip-std-proposals@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from mail-oi0-f69.google.com ([209.85.218.69]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1cy4n1-00051W-Eg for gclcip-std-proposals@m.gmane.org; Wed, 12 Apr 2017 01:01:35 +0200 Original-Received: by mail-oi0-f69.google.com with SMTP id b187sf8305464oif.11 for ; Tue, 11 Apr 2017 16:01:41 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=isocpp-org.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :x-original-sender:x-original-authentication-results:reply-to :precedence:mailing-list:list-id:x-spam-checked-in-group:list-post :list-help:list-archive:list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe; bh=oouM/li+TVy2GVzmIdDBXfLscXmCLKkyT43VJIPnzuk=; b=VX1h85bN0+cjGry+meuaujcAH7pIWdrtTtZhohkQk+QpTZQeu/X0Mci+4g128YjLtq D1aImGXJaQta8hBPDXCGg5Xp/1mlPyVq3tSXSCMj4xgD4QUK8mQL18RSLN9NKG8Elmtj WlQnItAx8ohKV45NR+lV4bcKCES6MSGQyEMmS6WDRgfPXojShIaeHNmr+3QMnxtaELhi iOtu0hYDfP6GT0M3CqMv1Kzp+zacUTsRhAlZ0KCYe8XmQHjXLYCKTDjSdX5iZoOoFA94 OOkYqch7wsTCdNcF7LeNiqN22yM9MYJhuIWVUabv8Dgg3otiqQhZawz/DubyPxf/OHpa IJog== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:x-original-sender :x-original-authentication-results:reply-to:precedence:mailing-list :list-id:x-spam-checked-in-group:list-post:list-help:list-archive :list-subscribe:list-unsubscribe; bh=oouM/li+TVy2GVzmIdDBXfLscXmCLKkyT43VJIPnzuk=; b=Rw/YFG++A05aUa6LAGpbB5OHKN84ordLTO6JiQxryZp7Kbv2HB2OPwEU62qrLv7+E3 3cAozTTQRIkkpwFd1mx0fy1M5Kgdkpl7tkgWyMUitwE33s9nTKJNiCf/r7j84nYwY8/r 0jJ/fnvQTfoIaPa+zacIYZgXNqO+3Twg3GjGwx+LtO3K44yk93ZIYtpLsEaanbJBqG3O cD65XhfU4ol+Jf6mWmN4Dr+aXh4iGQGpbfcvg9VKjRYp+Jr/rAgWLbTtGTxQ3lk6vf5H zmXYufRKllsPfsE9dSsyRr9U9g3Hp4RHH+KyvNo+b9+LJPqBY4MiUSmSXgnaNK5BTxy1 oOJw== X-Gm-Message-State: AN3rC/6vs+C5NFUhZryla9HNWpKNOl+ftAHXUgPCA/8emeiLpvFOZ2W4QELi5JrsPPehnQ== X-Received: by 10.157.0.38 with SMTP id 35mr6411068ota.129.1491951701141; Tue, 11 Apr 2017 16:01:41 -0700 (PDT) X-BeenThere: std-proposals@isocpp.org Original-Received: by 10.157.8.69 with SMTP id 63ls1288489oty.21.gmail; Tue, 11 Apr 2017 16:01:40 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.176.7.67 with SMTP id h61mr56636uah.22.1491951700300; Tue, 11 Apr 2017 16:01:40 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from mail-vk0-x22c.google.com (mail-vk0-x22c.google.com. [2607:f8b0:400c:c05::22c]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 31si8834946uab.140.2017.04.11.16.01.40 for (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 11 Apr 2017 16:01:40 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of patricer@gmail.com designates 2607:f8b0:400c:c05::22c as permitted sender) client-ip=2607:f8b0:400c:c05::22c; Original-Received: by mail-vk0-x22c.google.com with SMTP id z204so6084034vkd.1 for ; Tue, 11 Apr 2017 16:01:40 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.31.209.71 with SMTP id i68mr36970vkg.125.1491951699795; Tue, 11 Apr 2017 16:01:39 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: by 10.176.8.5 with HTTP; Tue, 11 Apr 2017 16:01:39 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <626cb97c-0eb4-3194-30e8-89245de2dc60@wanadoo.fr> X-Original-Sender: patricer@gmail.com X-Original-Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@gmail.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of patricer@gmail.com designates 2607:f8b0:400c:c05::22c as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=patricer@gmail.com; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=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:32081 Archived-At: --001a114e248216a958054cec13dd Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I agree with Vicente; priority inheritance protocols might be another interesting case where we the kind of solutions we will end up with for thread attributes might be applicable. Erik, if you could submit (it can be a simple direct email to me, maybe to Vicente too) an example of code where the features you have in mind would come into play, such that I can see what kind of user code you see right now, I would be interested. It might not be what ends up beoing proposed, but it can be useful and informative. Cheers! 2017-04-11 15:49 GMT-04:00 Vicente J. Botet Escriba < vicente.botet@wanadoo.fr>: > Le 11/04/2017 =C3=A0 11:20, erik.alapaa@gmail.com a =C3=A9crit : > >> Hi, >> >> I am a C++ developer mainly working in real-time systems (both hard and >> soft) and Linux systems/network programming. One sorely needed feature t= o >> be able to steer clear of naked pthread mutexes is the possibility to >> configure priority ceiling or priority inheritance on a std::mutex. >> Alternatively, a std:: wrapper for a pthread_mutex_t so it easily can be >> used with std::lock_guard or std::scoped_lock. >> >> Is there any plans to extend the std::threads library with such support, >> on OS:es that support priority inheritance mutexes? >> >> >> Hi, there are some proposals for thread attributes. If this ends by bein= g > adopted, I believe we could take the same approach for mutexes. > > P0320R1 Thread Constructor Attributes > P0484R0 Enhancing Thread Constructor Attributes > > Vicente > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to std-proposals+unsubscribe@isocpp.org. > To post to this group, send email to std-proposals@isocpp.org. > To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/a/is > ocpp.org/d/msgid/std-proposals/626cb97c-0eb4-3194-30e8- > 89245de2dc60%40wanadoo.fr. > --=20 You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "= ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e= mail to std-proposals+unsubscribe@isocpp.org. To post to this group, send email to std-proposals@isocpp.org. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/a/isocpp= ..org/d/msgid/std-proposals/CAKiZDp328Ff6xT2vgxiVrTUDhrq4aXfAipJKd9-JtSscU9R= pNg%40mail.gmail.com. --001a114e248216a958054cec13dd Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I agree with Vicente; priority inheritance proto= cols might be another interesting case where we the kind of solutions we wi= ll end up with for thread attributes might be applicable.

Erik= , if you could submit (it can be a simple direct email to me, maybe to Vice= nte too) an example of code where the features you have in mind would come = into play, such that I can see what kind of user code you see right now, I = would be interested. It might not be what ends up beoing proposed, but it c= an be useful and informative.

Cheers!

2017-04-11 15:49 GMT-04:00 Vicen= te J. Botet Escriba <vicente.botet@wanadoo.fr>:
Le 11/04/2017 =C3=A0 11:20, <= a href=3D"mailto:erik.alapaa@gmail.com" target=3D"_blank">erik.alapaa@gmail= ..com a =C3=A9crit :
Hi,

I am a C++ developer mainly working in real-time systems (both hard and sof= t) and Linux systems/network programming. One sorely needed feature to be a= ble to steer clear of naked pthread mutexes is the possibility to configure= priority ceiling or priority inheritance on a std::mutex. Alternatively, a= std:: wrapper for a pthread_mutex_t so it easily can be used with std::loc= k_guard or std::scoped_lock.

Is there any plans to extend the std::threads library with such support, on= OS:es that support priority inheritance mutexes?


 Hi, there are some proposals for thread attributes. If this ends by being a= dopted, I believe we could take the same approach for mutexes.

P0320R1=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0Thread Constructor Attributes
P0484R0=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0Enhancing Thread Constructor Attributes

Vicente

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &= quot;ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e= mail to std-proposals+unsubscribe@isocpp.org.
To post to this group, send email to std-proposals@isocpp.org.
 To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.co= m/a/isocpp.org/d/msgid/std-proposals/626cb97c-0eb4-3194-30e8-89245de2dc60%40wanadoo.fr.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups &= quot;ISO C++ Standard - Future Proposals" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an e= mail to std-proposa= ls+unsubscribe@isocpp.org.
To post to this group, send email to std-proposals@isocpp.org.
To view this discussion on the web visit htt= ps://groups.google.com/a/isocpp.org/d/msgid/std-proposals/CAKiZDp328Ff6xT2v= gxiVrTUDhrq4aXfAipJKd9-JtSscU9RpNg%40mail.gmail.com.
--001a114e248216a958054cec13dd-- .