Newsgroups: microsoft.public.win32.programmer.kernel
From: "Neill Clift [MS]" <nei...@microsoft.com>
Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2002 10:28:24 -0800
Local: Wed, Jan 9 2002 1:28 pm
Subject: Re: InitializeCriticalSectionAndSpinCount
I am trying to get the best tradeoff here I can. It was really
impossible to handle exceptions generated by EnterCriticalSection and LeaveCriticalSection because they left the CS in a state you couldn't recover from. This forced apps that wanted to be robust into using preallocation. We really want all apps to be robust so removing the raise was my top priority. I was left with a large number of internal apps using this flag and the associated memory usage did have an effect on the memory footprint. I therefore decided to ignore this flag. My reasoning is that any app getting the global object is getting it because its under memory pressure. Performance will be poor in this case anyway. I want to be robust in preference to performance in this out of memory case. I chose to ignore the flag because it helps a great deal with memory footprint. There is of course a one time penalty when we allocate the event but its not a great deal of time in comparison to waiting anyway. I don't really believe the difference between just waiting and allocating an event and waiting is significant. Neill. -- > On Fri, 4 Jan 2002 16:16:52 -0800, "Neill Clift [MS]"
> <nei...@microsoft.com> wrote: > >The idea behind setting the upper bit of the spin count is > However, this has also the drawback of getting things still more > (I know that NT is not a hard realtime system. However, it is > Daniel You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
| ||||||||||||||