[zeromq-dev] is priority inversion a problem?

Wolfgang Richter wor6c at virginia.edu
Wed Nov 14 15:46:02 CET 2012


I wouldn't mind working with Roger to make a minimal example triggering this.

Roger - did you have a programming language in mind?  I usually work in C with ZeroMQ or Python.

--
Wolf

On Nov 14, 2012, at 9:09 AM, Pieter Hintjens <ph at imatix.com> wrote:

> Do you have a reproducible case for this?
> 
> -Pieter
> 
> On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 11:01 PM, Roger Dannenberg <rbd at cs.cmu.edu> wrote:
>> Does ZeroMQ support communication among fixed priority threads using
>> inproc transport? It looks to me like ZeroMQ uses malloc to
>> allocate/free messages, which implies a shared lock on a shared heap. If
>> a low priority thread gets the lock and a medium priority thread
>> preempts it, can't that block a high priority thread indefinitely? I
>> believe OS X and Windows do not have locks with priority ceiling or
>> priority inheritance protocols, and it appears that Linux offers
>> priority inheritance but does not use it in malloc/free as implemented
>> in glibc, so it seems that priority inversion is (still) a potential
>> problem. Does ZeroMQ offer a solution?
>>     -Roger Dannenberg
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> zeromq-dev mailing list
>> zeromq-dev at lists.zeromq.org
>> http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
> _______________________________________________
> zeromq-dev mailing list
> zeromq-dev at lists.zeromq.org
> http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev



More information about the zeromq-dev mailing list