C++11提供了原子操作atomic;而在一些代码中,也会经常看到利用原子操作来实现spinklock(pthread提供的spinklock似乎性能不如mutex)。
于是,我就来试试用atomic来实现spinklock。
测试,仅仅是测试lock/unlock。测试平台是windows和linux.
测试结果,两种锁耗时完全一样;(另外,windows耗时大约是linux耗时的2倍)
于是,我就来试试用atomic来实现spinklock。
测试,仅仅是测试lock/unlock。测试平台是windows和linux.
测试结果,两种锁耗时完全一样;(另外,windows耗时大约是linux耗时的2倍)
测试结论:感觉,没有必要用spinklock,因为性能几乎没有差别;而spinklock用着还需要非常小心,因为它是忙等待(死循环等待).
#include <ctime>
#include <mutex>
#include <atomic>
class SpinLock
{
public:
SpinLock(){}
~SpinLock(){}
void Lock()
{
//如果已经有人set了,那么返回true;如果没有set,那么set并且返回false;
while (flag_.test_and_set())
{
//do nothing;
}
}
void UnLock()
{
flag_.clear();
}
private:
std::atomic_flag flag_;
};
struct SpinkLockGuard
{
public:
SpinkLockGuard(SpinLock &l) :spinlock_(l)
{
spinlock_.Lock();
}
~SpinkLockGuard()
{
spinlock_.UnLock();
}
private:
SpinLock &spinlock_;
};
int32_t times = 10*1024 * 1024;
//#define COST(t1,t0) ((t1.tv_sec-t0.tv_sec)*1000*1000 + (t1.tv_usec-t0.tv_usec))
#define COST(tv1,tv0) (int64_t)(((tv1-tv0)*1000*1000)/CLOCKS_PER_SEC)
void time_show(int64_t cost)
{
int64_t old = cost;
int32_t avg = (int32_t)(cost / times);
int32_t r_usec = cost % (1000);
cost = (int64_t)(cost / (1000));
int32_t r_msec = cost % 1000;
cost = (int64_t)(cost / (1000));
printf("[test]lock/unlock %d times\n", times);
printf("[test]\t cost all time (%ld:%d:%d)[s:ms:us](%ld'us) \n", cost, r_msec, r_usec, old);
printf("[test]\t cost avt = (%d:%d)[ms:us](one msg)\n", (int32_t)(avg / 1000), (int32_t)(avg % 1000));
}
void test_lock()
{
clock_t tv0, tv1;
tv0 = clock();
SpinLock lock_;
for (int32_t i = 0; i != times; ++i)
{
SpinkLockGuard guard(lock_);
}
tv1 = clock();
printf("spinklock cost time:\n");
time_show(COST(tv1, tv0));
clock_t tv2, tv3;
tv2 = clock();
std::mutex mutex_;
for (int32_t i = 0; i != times; ++i)
{
std::lock_guard<std::mutex> guard(mutex_);
}
tv3 = clock();
printf("\n---------------------------\nmutex lock cost time:\n");
time_show(COST(tv1, tv0));
}
int main()
{
test_lock();
return 0;
}