test case demonstrating PeekMessage give up timeslices

Alexandre Julliard julliard at winehq.org
Tue Aug 2 12:25:28 CDT 2005

Felix Nawothnig <felix.nawothnig at t-online.de> writes:

> But then that "extra" NtYieldExecution should not depend on
> !PM_NOYIELD since PM_NOYIELD doesn't have any effect on Windows, right?

It has an effect for Win16 apps, they need to release the Win16
lock. We could add a yield in the PM_NOYIELD case, but Win32 apps
won't use PM_NOYIELD anyway so I doubt it would make a difference, and
keeping it that way allows Winelib apps to tweak the behavior if

>> since a server call is much more expensive than a Windows system call.
> Would using shm fix that?

No, you don't want to put the message queue in shared memory, that's
not reliable.

Alexandre Julliard
julliard at winehq.org

More information about the wine-devel mailing list