On 09/16/12 12:03, Stefan Teleman wrote:
On Sat, Sep 15, 2012 at 5:47 PM, Liviu Nicoara nikko...@hates.ms wrote:
I merely wanted to point out that restoring the default packing is not the
same as restoring the packing to the previous value in effect.
Given this, I thought about an alternative
Umm, I didn't think to search for a corresponding incident and I considered the
defect to be so minor as to not warrant an issue. The following patch has been
applied already on 4.2.x:
Index: tests/support/atomic_xchg.cpp
===
---
On 09/22/12 00:51, Liviu Nicoara wrote:
Optimized (but not debug) builds fail to compile setlocale.cpp with the error:
A patch and a comment have been attached to the issue.
Thanks,
Liviu
On Sun, Sep 23, 2012 at 3:26 PM, Liviu Nicoara nikko...@hates.ms wrote:
To be honest it's quite bizarre that you cannot share that with us. Is it
really a trade secret? How can that be the case if Oracle customers are also
required to perform the same alignment, perhaps using the same
On 9/23/12 3:48 PM, Stefan Teleman wrote:
On Sun, Sep 23, 2012 at 3:26 PM, Liviu Nicoara nikko...@hates.ms wrote:
To be honest it's quite bizarre that you cannot share that with us. Is it
really a trade secret? How can that be the case if Oracle customers are also
required to perform the same
On Sun, Sep 23, 2012 at 5:23 PM, Stefan Teleman
stefan.tele...@gmail.com wrote:
The second URL says this:
QUOTE
Due to a change in the implementation of the userland mutexes
introduced by CR 6296770 in KU 137111-01, objects of type mutex_t and
pthread_mutex_t must start at 8-byte aligned
On 9/23/12 5:50 PM, Stefan Teleman wrote:
On Sun, Sep 23, 2012 at 5:23 PM, Stefan Teleman
stefan.tele...@gmail.com wrote:
The second URL says this:
QUOTE
Due to a change in the implementation of the userland mutexes
introduced by CR 6296770 in KU 137111-01, objects of type mutex_t and
On Fri, Sep 21, 2012 at 9:10 AM, Liviu Nicoara nikko...@hates.ms wrote:
On 09/21/12 05:13, Stefan Teleman wrote:
On Fri, Sep 21, 2012 at 2:28 AM, Travis Vitek
travis.vi...@roguewave.com wrote:
I have provided this list with test results showing that my patch
*does* fix the race condition
On Sun, Sep 23, 2012 at 7:25 PM, Liviu Nicoara nikko...@hates.ms wrote:
I am not asking for any other implementation and I am not looking to change
anything. I wish you could explain it to us, but in the absence of trade
secret details I will take an explanation for the questions above.
Liviu,
Should the volatile be to the left of the intT typename here? I know it is
equivalent, but it is weird to look at the line of code below and see that
we're following two different conventions.
Travis
___
From: Liviu Nicoara
Sent: Sunday, September
10 matches
Mail list logo
