[Python-Dev] Software Transactional Memory for Python

[Yury Selivanov]

Maybe it'd be better to put 'atomic' in the threading module?

On 2011-08-30, at 4:02 PM, Armin Rigo wrote:

> Re-hi,
> 
> 2011/8/29 Armin Rigo <arigo at tunes.org>:
>>> The problem is that many locks are actually acquired implicitely.
>>> For example, `print` to a buffered stream will acquire the fileobject's mutex.
>> 
>> Indeed.
>> (...)
>> I suspect that I need to do a more thorough review of the stdlib (...)
> 
> I found a solution not involving any change in CPython, and updated
> the patch.  The solution is to say that a "with atomic" block doesn't
> completely prevent other threads from re-acquiring the GIL, but only
> prevents them from proceeding to the following bytecode.  So if
> another thread is currently suspended in a place that releases the GIL
> for other reasons, then this other thread can still be switched to as
> normal, and continue running until the end of the current bytecode.  I
> think it's sane enough for the original purpose, and avoids most
> deadlock cases.
> 
> 
> A bientôt,
> 
> Armin.
> _______________________________________________
> Python-Dev mailing list
> Python-Dev at python.org
> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
> Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/yselivanov.ml%40gmail.com