On Fri, 5 Oct 2018 at 23:26, Ian Lance Taylor <i...@golang.org> wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 5, 2018 at 2:10 PM, Scott Cotton <w...@iri-labs.com> wrote: > > In fact > we definitely do want to add other preemption checks that occur at > points other than function entry (issues #10958, #24543). And if > there is another preemption check, there are no promises that > go:nosplit will disable that check. > >From what I understand, this would 1. enable more faire/balanced scheduling 2. reduce worst case gc latency 3. eliminate problems when programmers unintentionally spin with cooperative/stack based pre-emption. 4. slow things down a bit when fair/balanced scheduling and gc latency and 3) are not an issue 5. make it impossible to prevent pre-emption in cases that need it or rely on cooperative/stack based pre-emption 6. potentially re-order some sequences of system calls, so that Go programmer sequences of system calls G1, G2, ... may have Go runtime system calls inserted in between where they weren't previously. I don't think anyone wants 4,5 and 6 is frightening. Maybe I don't know what I'm doing, so perhaps others can give opinions? Or should this discussion be on the issue tracker or golang-dev? Scott -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "golang-nuts" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to golang-nuts+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
