在 2026-9-9 00:06, Kirill Makurin 写道:
 > 0019, 0020, 0021 delete tests for `pthread_mutexattr_gettype()`.

I mentioned that I want to add support for POSIX robust mutexes next, and this would require adding `pthread_mutexattr_{set,get}robust`. As a preparation step, I want to update `pthread_mutexattr_*` functions and add tests for each of them.

However, if you insist on keeping tests for `pthread_mutexattr_gettype` for now, I can change 0019.txt, 0020.txt and 0021.txt to preserve it. What you say?

It should be preferred to keep existing tests.


 > 0023 has this:
 >
 >     assert(pthread_create(&thread, NULL, ThreadA, &mutex) == 0);
 >     Sleep(100);
 >     /**
 >      * Ensure we do not dead lock if thread did not lock mutex fast enough.
 >      */
 >     assert(pthread_mutex_trylock(&mutex) == EBUSY);
 >
 > I think this is a bit fragile; you can use a barrier here.

Yeah, I had mixing feeling about this. Will it be ok to loop with `InterlockedExchange` in main until thread sets a variable? I hesitate to use `pthread_barrier_t` because its implementation uses `pthread_mutex_t`, so it would be a bit awkward.

Right; probably you want a Windows event which will be set after the child 
thread has acquired the mutex.




--
Best regards,
LIU Hao

Attachment: OpenPGP_signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

_______________________________________________
Mingw-w64-public mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mingw-w64-public

Reply via email to