They could still both have become ready (not in the same "cycle") between the two selects. Even if that probability is low, it would need knowledge like yours to show that this may in fact be zero. There could be a descheduling in between, one of those in my opinion, not relevant arguments. torsdag 29. april 2021 kl. 15:47:42 UTC+2 skrev Jan Mercl:
> On Thu, Apr 29, 2021 at 3:23 PM Øyvind Teig <oyvin...@teigfam.net> wrote: > > > 4c is not "correct" as I want it. In the pri select case, if more than > one is ready, then they shall not be randomly chosen. Never. They should be > selected according to priority. > > That's not what 4c says. Instead of "more than one ready" it says > "both high and low _get ready at the same time_". > > Note that in the first approximation the probability of 4c happening > is approaching zero. If we consider time "ticks" in discrete quanta, > the probability is proportional to the size of the quantum. And > depending on a particular implementation of the scheduler the > probability of 4c can still be exactly zero. For example, the OS > kernel may deliver only one signal at a time to the process etc. > > So the "Never" case may quite well never happen at all. > -- 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. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/golang-nuts/2460a16f-af1b-4613-ba4a-72b13e816a2bn%40googlegroups.com.
