delorie.com/archives/browse.cgi | search |
Mailing-List: | contact cygwin-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm |
List-Subscribe: | <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT sources DOT redhat DOT com> |
List-Archive: | <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/> |
List-Post: | <mailto:cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com> |
List-Help: | <mailto:cygwin-help AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs> |
Sender: | cygwin-owner AT sources DOT redhat DOT com |
Delivered-To: | mailing list cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com |
Subject: | RE: Cygwin Python -- Thread or not to thread... |
From: | Robert Collins <robert DOT collins AT itdomain DOT com DOT au> |
To: | Tim Peters <tim AT zope DOT com> |
Cc: | Cygwin <cygwin AT sources DOT redhat DOT com>, Python-List <python-list AT python DOT org> |
In-Reply-To: | <BIEJKCLHCIOIHAGOKOLHOEDMCHAA.tim@zope.com> |
References: | <BIEJKCLHCIOIHAGOKOLHOEDMCHAA DOT tim AT zope DOT com> |
X-Mailer: | Evolution/0.13 (Preview Release) |
Date: | 26 Sep 2001 08:16:40 +1000 |
Message-Id: | <1001456201.7752.12.camel@lifelesswks> |
Mime-Version: | 1.0 |
X-OriginalArrivalTime: | 25 Sep 2001 22:24:18.0881 (UTC) FILETIME=[D1598310:01C14610] |
On Wed, 2001-09-26 at 07:17, Tim Peters wrote: > [Jason Tishler] > > ... > > there is one known Cygwin pthreads race condition that can cause a hang, > > ... > > test_threadedtempfile hung due to the above mentioned problem. > > ... > > Should I still release my next Cygwin Python distribution with > > threading enabled? Or, should I continue to disabled threading > > until the above known Cygwin pthreads issue is resolved? > > Poor end users should never need to deal with thread race bugs, and > test_threadedtempfile is merely testing the robustness of a Python library > routine in the presence of threads. So a user can get burned by this > through no fault of their own -- tempfile.TemporaryFile() is meant to be > used by everyone, threads or not. I don't know if tempfile.TemporaryFile() tickles teh bug every time or not. I can say with confidence that the situation under NT is _no worse_ than windows 95 has always been. The race was introduced while moving from win32 mutex's to CriticalSection's, for purely performance reasons. Win32 Mutex's are _slow_. Critical sections made a huge difference - so that's not going to be rolled backanytime soon. The correct solution will come when we can solve the problem for win9x - we will ahve a solution for NT. I'm not advocating releasing python-with-threading-that-may-tickle-this-bug or not releasing it - I don't care either way. I'm simply trying to be clear about the situation. > > ... > > By releasing a threaded Cygwin Python, more people will be able to > > exercise Cygwin's pthreads support which will help test the > > implementation. > > If it's already known to be flawed, what's the point in having millions of > users confirm it <wink>? There are probably other bugs we don't know about. The nearly-feature-complete pthread code base in cygwin is quite young, and getting more exercise is a good thing. Rob (Cygwin pthreads maintainer). -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
webmaster | delorie software privacy |
Copyright © 2019 by DJ Delorie | Updated Jul 2019 |