Terminate unused worker threads

Ryan Newton newton at mit.edu
Wed Nov 17 13:55:53 EST 2010

Hi all,

Apologies for commenting before understanding Capability.c very well.  But
it seems that this file uses locking quite heavily.  Has there been an
analysis of whether atomic memory ops and lock free algorithms could play
any role here?

Simon mentioned keeping track of the number of items in the queue so as not
to have to traverse it while holding the lock.  That, for example, seems
that it could be accomplished with an atomically modified counter.


On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 10:25 AM, Edward Z. Yang <ezyang at mit.edu> wrote:

> Excerpts from Simon Marlow's message of Wed Nov 17 06:15:46 -0500 2010:
> > I suggest keeping track of the number of items in the queue.
> Ok, I added a spare_workers_no field to the Capability struct.
> > So I think the main thing missing is a call to workerTaskStop().
> Added.
> > It would be really nice if we could arrange that in the case where we
> > have too many spare workers, the extra workers exit via the same route,
> > but I suspect that might not be easy.
> Do you mean, spare workers that have useful tasks to do?
> Edward
> _______________________________________________
> Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list
> Glasgow-haskell-users at haskell.org
> http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/glasgow-haskell-users
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.haskell.org/pipermail/glasgow-haskell-users/attachments/20101117/58711d2f/attachment.html

More information about the Glasgow-haskell-users mailing list