Re: nptl 0.30

I beg to differ Ulrich .

May be Alexander was refering to the known futex_wake() with locked mutex
symdrom :

File sysdeps/pthread/pthread_cond_wait.c, line 61

lll_futex_wake (futex, INT_MAX);
/* We are done.  */
lll_mutex_unlock (cbuffer->cond->__data.__lock);


That means that the awaken thread(s) will hit the locked mutex.

Just invert those lines to :

lll_mutex_unlock (cbuffer->cond->__data.__lock); /* much better to call
futex_wake() with the mutex unlocked */
lll_futex_wake (futex, INT_MAX);

Thanks.
Eric

----- Original Message -----
From: "Ulrich Drepper" <[email protected]>
To: "Alexander Terekhov" <[email protected]>
Cc: "NPTlibrarymailinglist" <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2003 12:19 PM
Subject: Re: nptl 0.30


> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Alexander Terekhov wrote:
>
> > It's still way too strict and signaling is way too "paralyzed"
>
> That's complete BS.
>
> - --
> - --------------.                        ,-.            444 Castro Street
> Ulrich Drepper \    ,-----------------'   \ Mountain View, CA 94041 USA
> Red Hat         `--' drepper at redhat.com `---------------------------
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux)
>
> iD8DBQE+dwC/2ijCOnn/RHQRAg8dAKCI1TofcEAYROw8aQ2i3/0zJ2LmaQCggc4Y
> 3dFqzLBfRvt1IpXI7O/6594=
> =fjSR
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
>
>
> --
> Phil-list mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/phil-list
>