[squeak-dev] Are Squeak processes pre-emptive?
bert at freudenbergs.de
Tue Apr 13 16:53:34 UTC 2010
On 13.04.2010, at 18:46, Eliot Miranda wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 13, 2010 at 9:24 AM, Randal L. Schwartz <merlyn at stonehenge.com> wrote:
> >>>>> "Ang" == Ang BeePeng <beepeng86 at yahoo.com> writes:
> Ang> Are Squeak processes pre-emptive? Are infinite loop processes safe
> Ang> to run?
> Squeak uses a simple priority scheme.
> A Squeak process runs until it yields or it is interrupted by a higher
> priority process event. When it is interrupted, it goes to the back of
> the queue, so when the higher priority process pauses or completes,
> other processes at the same priority are likely to be run instead.
> IMO the sending of the preempted process to the back of the queue is a bug. It means one cannot rely on cooperative scheduling within a priority level. On the other hand, if the VM does not send the preempted process to the back of the queue there is nothing to prevent a higher-priority process altering the run queues of lower priority processes, achieving the same thing. But it is flexible if the scheduler code does it rather than the VM. One can imagine per-process priorities being examined so that by default a process gets moved to the back of its run queue when preempted, but if a process has a "don't preempt me" property it is not.
My guess is this odd behavior was like an accidental round-robin scheduler ... But changing it now might provoke rather obscure problems, no?
- Bert -
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Squeak-dev