Mail Archives: cygwin-developers/2001/09/12/18:46:09
On Thu, 2001-09-13 at 03:23, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 12, 2001 at 07:21:04PM +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> >On Wed, Sep 12, 2001 at 12:56:41PM -0400, Christopher Faylor wrote:
> >> On Wed, Sep 12, 2001 at 06:48:12PM +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> >> >On Wed, Sep 12, 2001 at 06:40:31PM +0200, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> >> >> On Tue, Sep 11, 2001 at 10:00:11PM +1000, Robert Collins wrote:
> >> >> > + if (iswinnt)
> >> >> > + InitializeCriticalSection (&criticalsection);
> >> >> > + else
> >> >> > + {
> >> >> > + this->win32_obj_id =::CreateMutex (&sec_none_nih, false, NULL);
> >> >> > + if (!win32_obj_id)
> >> >> > + magic = 0;
> >> >> > + }
> >> >>
> >> >> Could somebody give me a short hint why we're using critical
> >> >> sections on NT only? I need some three word only description...
> >> >> something memorable...
> >> >
> >> >Whoops, is the fact that TryEnterCriticalSection() is only
> >> >available since NT4 the reason, perhaps???
> >>
> >> Apparently.
> >>
> >> Cygwin's muto class actually does a sort of critical section and has
> >> TryEnterCriticalSection capabilities.
> >>
> >> I don't think that mutos are necessarily general purpose enough for
> >> this but maybe we could do something similar. Or we could probably
> >> roll our own version of TryEnterCriticalSection.
> >
> >Don't worry. I'm just asking to know how to name the new wincap
> >flag for that stuff. :-)
>
> I *am* concerned about YA performance hit on Windows 9x, though. I'd like
> to avoid that if possible.
No hit, its been like it is now since day 1. (Well actually there was
the process wide mutex serialisation when I first started hacking at it,
but thats long gone).
I just had the opportunity to make NT *faster*.
Rob
- Raw text -