On Sun, Sep 16, 2001 at 08:30:15PM -0700, Aaron Bannert wrote: > Agreed, but instead of adding sleep we should: > a) call pthread_setconcurrency() > b) devise a more life-like test > c) not do anything cause it's working fine > > testlockperf is really just trying to gauge the overhead from the > mutex routines, and I think it does a very good job of that. The secondary > purpose of testlockperf is to compare the old locking API to the new > one.
Without enforcing the lock routines to be run in parallel, you aren't testing the expected common case - therefore, it isn't a good test. Yes, you could call pthread_setconcurrency(), but I think you are going to misjudge the appropriate number to pass to it (as I think there is no number that makes sense for all cases). If you really want pthread_setconcurrency to equal the number of threads, you want to enforce a bound thread implementation (which is different than creating a thread as bound with a multiplexed thread implementation). At this point, we should both shut up and get some numbers. -- justin
