Date: Thu, 11 Feb 2010 12:22:37 +0800 From: David Xu <davidxu@freebsd.org> To: Alexander Leidinger <Alexander@Leidinger.net> Cc: svn-src-head@FreeBSD.org, svn-src-all@FreeBSD.org, src-committers@FreeBSD.org, mono@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r203657 - head/sys/kern Message-ID: <4B73860D.1010808@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <20100210165213.95990l8r0b7latrk@webmail.leidinger.net> References: <201002080731.o187V5Pk072517@svn.freebsd.org> <20100210165213.95990l8r0b7latrk@webmail.leidinger.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Alexander Leidinger wrote: > Quoting David Xu <davidxu@FreeBSD.org> (from Mon, 8 Feb 2010 07:31:05 > +0000 (UTC)): > >> Author: davidxu >> Date: Mon Feb 8 07:31:05 2010 >> New Revision: 203657 >> URL: http://svn.freebsd.org/changeset/base/203657 >> >> Log: >> Set waiters flag before checking semaphore's counter, >> otherwise we might lose a wakeup. Tested on postgresql database >> server. > > Uhm... if I ktrace a hanging process and I see some semop()s (I assume > it is waiting on some event to happen), where on Linux this process is > working correctly, then I would like to test this patch to see if the > process still has the same problem? > > Or differently asked: this affects the operation of semop(2)? > > Bye, > Alexander. > This implementation uses umtx, the one in RELENG_8 uses semop() syscall. They are unrelated.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4B73860D.1010808>