GNU bug report logs - #21887
'monitor' form broken

Previous Next

Full log

Message #8 received at 21887 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Andy Wingo <wingo <at> pobox.com>
To: taylanbayirli <at> gmail.com (Taylan Ulrich "Bayırlı/Kammer")
Cc: 21887 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#21887: 'monitor' form broken
Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2016 18:04:06 +0200

Hi Taylan,

On Thu 12 Nov 2015 16:29, taylanbayirli <at> gmail.com (Taylan Ulrich "Bayırlı/Kammer") writes:

> It seems that the 'monitor' form is currently a no-op.  The form
>
>     (par-for-each (lambda (x)
>                     (monitor
>                       (foo)))
>                   xs)
>
> should be functionally equivalent to
>
>     (let ((mutex (make-mutex)))
>       (par-for-each (lambda (x)
>                       (with-mutex mutex
>                         (foo)))
>                     xs))
>
> but currently becomes
>
>     (par-for-each (lambda (x)
>                     (let ((mutex (make-mutex)))
>                       (with-mutex mutex
>                         (foo))))
>                   xs)
>
> which is ineffective.
>
> I don't know what's the best way to fix this.  The simplest thing that
> comes to my mind is something along the lines of:
>
>     (define-syntax monitor
>       (lambda (stx)
>         (syntax-case stx ()
>           ((_ body body* ...)
>            (let ((uuid (generate-uuid)))
>              #`(with-mutex (mutex-with-uuid #,uuid)
>                  body body* ...))))))
>
> where mutex-with-uuid looks it up from a hash table at run-time and
> instantiates it when it doesn't exist, this operation also being
> synchronized across threads, like:
>
>     (define mutex-table (make-hash-table))
>
>     (define mutex-table-mutex (make-mutex))
>
>     (define (mutex-with-uuid uuid)
>       (with-mutex mutex-table-mutex
>         (or (hash-ref mutex-table uuid)
>             (let ((mutex (make-mutex)))
>               (hash-set! mutex-table uuid mutex)
>               mutex))))
>
> If that looks OK, I can try to make a proper patch from it.  I'm not
> sure what I'd use in place of `generate-uuid' though.  Would `gensym' be
> good enough?

You're totally right on all points.  Please do prepare a patch :)  I
wish we could do something faster for the "embedded" mutex but
correctness should come first.

Cheers,

Andy

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.