apr-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jeff Trawick <traw...@attglobal.net>
Subject Re: testatomic
Date Wed, 03 Dec 2003 14:36:41 GMT
Joe Orton wrote:

> I am just looking at CuTifying testatomic - what is the thread_func_none
> test for?  It appears to just test that z++ is atomic for a volatile
> long z, which it isn't of course... am I missing something?

It isn't clear from the messages, but after playing with testatomic yesterday 
(and finding a platform where the none test actually fails) I think the value 
of it is this, given that z++ is not atomic and such a test can be expected to 
fail given an interesting level of concurrency:

if the z++ test works, then we probably haven't established the right level of 
concurrency to do a valid test of the atomic operations

if the z++ test fails, it is a strong suggestion that the other tests we did 
were meaningful (i.e., there was adequate concurrency)



Mime
View raw message