[concurrency-interest] On A Formal Definition of 'Data-Race'
mudit.f2004912 at gmail.com
Mon Apr 15 09:46:37 EDT 2013
Is data race a race even when it is OK to loose updates/writes and read
older stuff while working on shared memory?
On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 3:41 PM, Vitaly Davidovich <vitalyd at gmail.com>wrote:
> Yes this is racy; it may be benign but that depends on context. If you
> have reader/writer of shared memory with no explicit synch or HB, it's a
> race by (informal) definition.
> On Apr 13, 2013 9:51 PM, "thurstonn" <thurston at nomagicsoftware.com> wrote:
>> Before I answer fully, let me ask you about another variant of the
>> Thread 1 Thread 2
>> this.shared = 10 local = this.shared
>> Is this "racy"? Clearly there is no explicit happens-before. But, at
>> in my reading of the (your) definition that I quoted in my OP, it wouldn't
>> qualify as a data-race.
>> View this message in context:
>> Sent from the JSR166 Concurrency mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>> Concurrency-interest mailing list
>> Concurrency-interest at cs.oswego.edu
> Concurrency-interest mailing list
> Concurrency-interest at cs.oswego.edu
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Concurrency-interest