Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2003 08:12:24 +0800 From: "David Xu" <davidxu@freebsd.org> To: "Daniel Eischen" <eischen@pcnet1.pcnet.com>, "David Xu" <davidxu@viatech.com.cn> Cc: freebsd-threads@freebsd.org Subject: Re: pthread_join Message-ID: <007401c30d1a$da3d7f40$0701a8c0@tiger> References: <Pine.GSO.4.10.10304271048300.20259-100000@pcnet1.pcnet.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In thr_cleanup(), joinee accesses joiner without holding joiner's sched =
lock,
it is possible when joinee accesses joiner, the joiner may disappear =
(canceled).
if ((joiner->state =3D=3D PS_JOIN) &&
(joiner->join_status.thread =3D=3D thread)) {
joiner->join_status.thread =3D NULL;
David Xu
----- Original Message -----=20
From: "Daniel Eischen" <eischen@pcnet1.pcnet.com>
To: "David Xu" <davidxu@viatech.com.cn>
Cc: <freebsd-threads@freebsd.org>
Sent: Sunday, April 27, 2003 11:02 PM
Subject: Re: pthread_join
> On Sun, 27 Apr 2003, David Xu wrote:
> > I found I can not get the following race fixed:
> > Thread A is a joiner of thread B, thread C calls pthread_cancel on =
A,
> > because of multipile scheduler locks, I can not get the race fixed. =
> > Is it possible we just use a single scheduler lock to simplify =
things a bit?
>=20
> Hmm, you mean if thread A is already joined on B? I don't see the
> race. Everything looks right. We don't take multiple scheduling
> locks at the same time, so everything should work.
>=20
> --=20
> Dan Eischen
>=20
> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-threads@freebsd.org mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-threads
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to =
"freebsd-threads-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
>=20
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?007401c30d1a$da3d7f40$0701a8c0>