Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

expand thread::park explanation #56157

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Dec 10, 2018
Merged
Changes from 2 commits
Commits
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension

Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
26 changes: 21 additions & 5 deletions src/libstd/thread/mod.rs
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -806,9 +806,13 @@ const NOTIFIED: usize = 2;
/// In other words, each [`Thread`] acts a bit like a spinlock that can be
/// locked and unlocked using `park` and `unpark`.
///
/// Notice that it would be a valid (but inefficient) implementation to make both [`park`] and
RalfJung marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved Hide resolved
/// [`unpark`] NOPs that return immediately. Being unblocked does not imply
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

s/NOPs that return immediately/return immediately/.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

In general since this is a public API, I would prefer wording to not be in terms of how the implementation could be (i.e. implemented to return immediately), but what the implementation is allowed to do (return spuriously without necessarily synchronizing with anything).

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think examples are very useful to demonstrate where spurious wakeups may come from. For me personally, I have seen this "spurious wakeups allowed" stuff often, but only when I recently read "NOPs are a valid implementation" then it clicked for me.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I have changed the order a bit, putting the API contract first and the example second. What do you think?

/// any synchronization with someone that unparked this thread, it could also be spurious.
///
/// The API is typically used by acquiring a handle to the current thread,
/// placing that handle in a shared data structure so that other threads can
/// find it, and then `park`ing. When some desired condition is met, another
/// find it, and then `park`ing in a loop. When some desired condition is met, another
/// thread calls [`unpark`] on the handle.
///
/// The motivation for this design is twofold:
Expand All @@ -823,21 +827,33 @@ const NOTIFIED: usize = 2;
///
/// ```
/// use std::thread;
/// use std::sync::{Arc, atomic::{Ordering, AtomicBool}};
/// use std::time::Duration;
///
/// let parked_thread = thread::Builder::new()
/// .spawn(|| {
/// let flag = Arc::new(AtomicBool::new(false));
/// let flag2 = Arc::clone(&flag);
///
/// let parked_thread = thread::spawn(move || {
/// // We want to wait until the flag is set. We *could* just spin, but using
/// // park/unpark is more efficient.
/// while !flag2.load(Ordering::Acquire) {
/// println!("Parking thread");
/// thread::park();
/// // We *could* get here spuriously, i.e., way before the 10ms below are over!
/// // But that is no problem, we are in a loop until the flag is set anyway.
/// println!("Thread unparked");
/// })
/// .unwrap();
/// }
/// println!("Flag received");
/// });
///
/// // Let some time pass for the thread to be spawned.
/// thread::sleep(Duration::from_millis(10));
///
/// // Set the flag, and let the thread wake up.
/// // There is no race condition here, if `unpark`
/// // happens first, `park` will return immediately.
/// // Hence there is no risk of a deadlock.
/// flag.store(true, Ordering::Release);
/// println!("Unpark the thread");
/// parked_thread.thread().unpark();
///
Expand Down