Related articles |
---|
Instrumenting multithreaded applications legendre@u.arizona.edu (Matthew Legendre) (2003-01-21) |
Re: Instrumenting multithreaded applications nmm1@cus.cam.ac.uk (2003-01-25) |
Re: Instrumenting multithreaded applications mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de (Dmitry A.Kazakov) (2003-01-25) |
Re: Instrumenting multithreaded applications jstracke@speakeasy.net (John Stracke) (2003-01-25) |
Re: Instrumenting multithreaded applications bobduff@World.std.com (Robert A Duff) (2003-01-25) |
Re: Instrumenting multithreaded applications bje@redhat.com (Ben Elliston) (2003-01-25) |
Re: Instrumenting multithreaded applications joachim_d@gmx.de (Joachim Durchholz) (2003-01-25) |
Re: Instrumenting multithreaded applications chase@world.std.com (David Chase) (2003-01-25) |
Re: Instrumenting multithreaded applications lex@cc.gatech.edu (Lex Spoon) (2003-01-25) |
Re: Instrumenting multithreaded applications idbaxter@semdesigns.com (Ira Baxter) (2003-01-26) |
From: | Robert A Duff <bobduff@World.std.com> |
Newsgroups: | comp.compilers |
Date: | 25 Jan 2003 00:56:21 -0500 |
Organization: | The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA |
References: | 03-01-118 |
Keywords: | testing, parallel, performance |
Posted-Date: | 25 Jan 2003 00:56:20 EST |
Matthew Legendre <legendre@u.arizona.edu> writes:
> We've got a situation where we want to insert instrumentation into a
> multithreaded application (for profiling purposes). We need to use some
> form of mutual exclusion since the instrumentation writes to a global data
> structure.
Why not keep a separate data structure for each thread, and for each
interrupt handler? Then the instrumentation code can write upon the
data structure with no locking. (That seems better anyway, since it
will perturb the timing results less than a locking implementation.)
Then merge the data structures "later" -- at the end of the program,
or write them out separately and merge them in a separate program.
- Bob
Return to the
comp.compilers page.
Search the
comp.compilers archives again.