apr-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Branko ─îibej <br...@apache.org>
Subject Re: svn commit: r1790105 - in /apr/apr/branches/1.6.x: locks/unix/misc.c locks/unix/proc_mutex.c locks/unix/thread_mutex.c test/testlock.c
Date Thu, 06 Apr 2017 23:17:36 GMT
On 06.04.2017 21:05, Yann Ylavic wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 6, 2017 at 9:01 PM, Branko ─îibej <brane@apache.org> wrote:
>> On 06.04.2017 20:49, Yann Ylavic wrote:
>>> On Thu, Apr 6, 2017 at 1:40 PM, Jim Jagielski <jim@jagunet.com> wrote:
>>>> apr-trunk (r1790379):
>>>>   % ./testall -v testprocmutex
>>>>   testprocmutex       : -Line 189: Locks don't appear to work with timedlock
>>>>   -flock_timedlock() not implemented,/Line 189: Locks don't appear to work
with timedlock
>>>>   -Line 189: Locks don't appear to work with timedlock
>>>>   -fcntl_timedlock() not implemented,-Line 133: create the mutex
>>>>   /default_timed_timedlock() not implemented,-Line 172: Default timed timedlock
not implemented
>>>>   FAILED 4 of 6
>>>>   Failed Tests                  Total   Fail    Failed %
>>>>   ===================================================
>>>>   testprocmutex                     6      4     66.67%
>>>>
>>>> apr-1.6 (r1790305):
>>>>   % ./testall -v testprocmutex
>>>>   testprocmutex       : -flock_timedlock() not implemented,-Line 194: Locks
don't appear to work with timedlock
>>>>   -fcntl_timedlock() not implemented,FAILED 1 of 6
>>>>   Failed Tests                  Total   Fail    Failed %
>>>>   ===================================================
>>>>   testprocmutex                     6      1     16.67%
>>>>
>>>> we seem to be going backwards (apr-trunk includes the fallback)
>>>> since now we lost default_timed_timedlock()
>>> I tried to not modify the other (non PROC_PTHREAD) mechanisms normally.
>>> Could it be, e.g., r1790303 (which is not in 1.6.x either)?
>>>
>>> Anyway, I just commited another fallback (r1790436), could you please
>>> test this version on OSX?
>>> If pshared mutex+cond still do not work as expected on OSX, maybe we
>>> could un-configure it (i.e. ac_have_pthread_condattr_setpshared="no")
>>> and let it fall through the new generic fallback...
>> This is on OSX 10.11.6 with clang from XCode 8.2.1.
> Thanks Brane, can you confirm (on trunk) that
> HAVE_PTHREAD_CONDATTR_SETPSHARED is defined, hence it's working as
> expected?

brane@zulu:~/src/apr/build/trunk$ grep HAVE_PTHREAD_CONDATTR_SETPSHARED ./include/arch/unix/apr_private.h
#define HAVE_PTHREAD_CONDATTR_SETPSHARED 1


Looks good?

-- Brane

Mime
View raw message