On Tue, Jan 26, 2021 at 3:06 PM Matthew Flatt <[email protected]> wrote:
> At Tue, 26 Jan 2021 14:49:22 +0100, Ryan Culpepper wrote: > > Thanks for the pointer! Those sound useful, but in the spirit of maximum > > caution, is there a guarantee that the write to the box from the new OS > > thread will be visible to the original Racket OS thread when the poller > > tries to read it? Is `box-cas!` or one of the memory-order operations > > needed? > > I think enough synchronization is implied by `(signal-received)` and > the way it interacts with the scheduler. That is, there's no guarantee > that the waiting thread sees a box change right away, but signaling the > waiting thread will imply a barrier on both the signaling side and > waiting side, so that the next poll iteration after receiving the > signal will definitely see the update at the latest. If that sounds > right, we could make that a guarantee for signaling and polling. > That sounds reasonable. Thanks! Ryan -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Racket Users" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/racket-users/CANy33q%3DETxYur_5VNFmdROjqg69u_gRWgqwmNq%3DW5cFQKnEOPQ%40mail.gmail.com.
