[Python-Dev] Removing the GIL (Me, not you!) (original) (raw)
Jon Ribbens jon+python-dev at unequivocal.co.uk
Thu Sep 13 13:55:38 CEST 2007
- Previous message: [Python-Dev] Removing the GIL (Me, not you!)
- Next message: [Python-Dev] Removing the GIL (Me, not you!)
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On Thu, Sep 13, 2007 at 01:15:39PM +0200, "Martin v. Löwis" wrote:
> To put it another way, would it actually matter if the reference > counts for such objects became hopelessly wrong due to non-atomic > adjustments?
If they drop to zero (which may happen due to non-atomic adjustments), Python will try to release the static memory, which will crash the malloc implementation.
That could be avoided by a flag on the object which is checked in free(). I'm just suggesting it as an alternative as it sounds like it might be more efficient than either locking or avoiding having reference counts on these objects (especially if the reference count is initialised to MAX_INT/2 or whatever).
- Previous message: [Python-Dev] Removing the GIL (Me, not you!)
- Next message: [Python-Dev] Removing the GIL (Me, not you!)
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]