> * At a point where a thread releases a lock (in the original
> program), if another thread of equal or higher priority is waiting on
> the lock, the other thread should be allowed to obtain (perhaps we
> need to limited this to "compete for") the lock within a short
> interval.
Well, I hope not to be too cynical or pessimistic about this, but I
am. Last I knew, there are JVM providers who absolutely will not
accept such rules. (I believe that similar issues arose in POSIX.) I
think the best we could hope for universal acceptance of is
probablistic weak fairness. ("probablistic" because anything based in
part on spinlocks will rely in part on effectively random hardware
events.)
-Doug
-------------------------------
JavaMemoryModel mailing list - http://www.cs.umd.edu/~pugh/java/memoryModel
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Oct 13 2005 - 07:00:29 EDT