delorie.com/archives/browse.cgi | search |
X-Recipient: | archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com |
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: | No, hits=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS |
X-Spam-Check-By: | sourceware.org |
To: | cygwin AT cygwin DOT com |
From: | Nicholas Sherlock <n DOT sherlock AT gmail DOT com> |
Subject: | Cygwin PThreads bug? |
Date: | Wed, 04 Mar 2009 14:29:54 +1300 |
Lines: | 49 |
Message-ID: | <gokli9$s59$1@ger.gmane.org> |
Mime-Version: | 1.0 |
User-Agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.8) Gecko/20051201 Thunderbird/1.5 Mnenhy/0.7.3.0 |
X-IsSubscribed: | yes |
Mailing-List: | contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm |
List-Id: | <cygwin.cygwin.com> |
List-Subscribe: | <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com> |
List-Archive: | <http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/> |
List-Post: | <mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com> |
List-Help: | <mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs> |
Sender: | cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com |
Mail-Followup-To: | cygwin AT cygwin DOT com |
Delivered-To: | mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com |
Hey everyone, I'm writing a very thread-intensive application using Cygwin and Cygwin's PThreads implementation, and I'm running into a few problems. As far as I can tell from the spec: http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/000095399/functions/pthread_rwlock_rdlock.html This C program: #include <stdio.h> #include <pthread.h> #include <assert.h> #include <errno.h> int main() { pthread_rwlock_t rw_lock; pthread_rwlock_init(&rw_lock,NULL); //Lock it once for read... assert(pthread_rwlock_rdlock(&rw_lock)==0); //Lock it again for read... int err=pthread_rwlock_rdlock(&rw_lock); printf("Err %d\n", err); assert (err==EAGAIN || err==0); if (err!=EAGAIN) pthread_rwlock_unlock(&rw_lock); pthread_rwlock_unlock(&rw_lock); pthread_rwlock_destroy(&rw_lock); return 0; } Should run correctly. That is, the second call to pthread_rwlock_rdlock should either succeed (returning zero), having acquired the read lock a second time, or it should fail and return EAGAIN, if the number of simultaneous allowed read locks has been exceeded. It should not fail and return EDEADLK (45), which it is currently doing. Am I reading the spec wrong or is Cygwin non-conforming? Cheers, Nicholas Sherlock -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
webmaster | delorie software privacy |
Copyright © 2019 by DJ Delorie | Updated Jul 2019 |