|
From: ERSEK L. <la...@ca...> - 2009-11-05 19:48:24
|
(Is SF broken? The web interface doesn't thread threads; whitespace formatting is lost even though my message was plain text; I didn't receive Julian's reply, even though I'm subscribed and receive commit logs and other messages; and only two thirds of the calendar table fit into a browser window 954 pixels wide.) On Thu, Nov 5, 2009 at 11:15 AM, Julian Seward <js...@ac...> wrote: > I believe Laszlo's comments are valid and correct, and an interesting > solution. I'd have to stare at it more it be convinced it's correct, but > it looks plausible. Thank you. I figured it might not be completely useless if somebody can compile her code with all these holding: - the code stays correct, - Valgrind headers are not installed -- no Valgrind specific ANNOTATE_* macros, - Valgrind still sees the condvar dependency in the binary in any case. (I think of this as a possible manual amendment, not a change to valgrind's instrumentation. I have no idea whether that would be possible at all.) > Laszlo, can you explain the background to this a bit? How did you come > to be looking at this problem? I develop lbzip2 (see <200...@ac...>), and the sponsor of my lbzip2 Debian package, Paul Wise, mentioned valgrind. I said I already tested with valgrind [0]. (Not because I was investigating a bug -- I was simply curious.) However, this made me remember reading some caveat in the Helgrind manual. I re-read that section and pthread_cond_timedwait() just occurred to me. > Does your solution help? I didn't try it out. If we cannot prove it's correct (or worse, we can disprove it), there's no need to. If we prove it correct, there's kinda no need to either :) Thanks, lacos [0] http://lists.debian.org/debian-mentors/2009/11/msg00060.html |