Vom: Mon, 2 Feb 2026 22:20:29 +0100

> On 2/2/26 10:15 PM, Daniel Hiepler wrote:
> >> [...] caused the existing test to fail [...]  
> > Sorry got that wrong. Should be "caused the new test to fail".
> > (The test included more rsh commands than the existing one. Some
> > commands suffered from a race condtion that caused the test to fail
> > from time to time.)  
> Yeah, we are addressing the race conditions. The code is written 
> multi-threaded, but it lacks locks around basically everything. Pressing 
> a bit in tests will expose them. Other programs have the same or similar 
> problems.
> 
> Basically, I've been rewriting linuxcncrsh's code base to get that fixed :-)
> 

I doubt the cause for the race conditions (at least in my case) are in 
emcrsh.cc or shcom.cc.

IIRC, I found emcCommandWaitDone() [1] basically useless for some commands as 
those return RCS_STATUS::DONE although they've not updated the model, yet.
But I didn't dig further back then.


[1] 
https://github.com/LinuxCNC/linuxcnc/blob/master/src/emc/usr_intf/shcom.cc#L273


Best regards
-- 
  Daniel


_______________________________________________
Emc-developers mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-developers

Reply via email to