Since SpinLockAcquire() / SpinLockRelease() macros usually reference variables declared as volatile, I wonder if the following changes should be applied.
-- Antonin Houska Cybertec Schönig & Schönig GmbH Gröhrmühlgasse 26 A-2700 Wiener Neustadt Web: http://www.postgresql-support.de, http://www.cybertec.at
diff --git a/src/backend/storage/ipc/shm_mq.c b/src/backend/storage/ipc/shm_mq.c index 0e60dbc..256d09d 100644 --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/shm_mq.c +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/shm_mq.c @@ -195,11 +195,11 @@ shm_mq_set_receiver(shm_mq *mq, PGPROC *proc) volatile shm_mq *vmq = mq; PGPROC *sender; - SpinLockAcquire(&mq->mq_mutex); + SpinLockAcquire(&vmq->mq_mutex); Assert(vmq->mq_receiver == NULL); vmq->mq_receiver = proc; sender = vmq->mq_sender; - SpinLockRelease(&mq->mq_mutex); + SpinLockRelease(&vmq->mq_mutex); if (sender != NULL) SetLatch(&sender->procLatch); @@ -214,11 +214,11 @@ shm_mq_set_sender(shm_mq *mq, PGPROC *proc) volatile shm_mq *vmq = mq; PGPROC *receiver; - SpinLockAcquire(&mq->mq_mutex); + SpinLockAcquire(&vmq->mq_mutex); Assert(vmq->mq_sender == NULL); vmq->mq_sender = proc; receiver = vmq->mq_receiver; - SpinLockRelease(&mq->mq_mutex); + SpinLockRelease(&vmq->mq_mutex); if (receiver != NULL) SetLatch(&receiver->procLatch); @@ -233,9 +233,9 @@ shm_mq_get_receiver(shm_mq *mq) volatile shm_mq *vmq = mq; PGPROC *receiver; - SpinLockAcquire(&mq->mq_mutex); + SpinLockAcquire(&vmq->mq_mutex); receiver = vmq->mq_receiver; - SpinLockRelease(&mq->mq_mutex); + SpinLockRelease(&vmq->mq_mutex); return receiver; } @@ -249,9 +249,9 @@ shm_mq_get_sender(shm_mq *mq) volatile shm_mq *vmq = mq; PGPROC *sender; - SpinLockAcquire(&mq->mq_mutex); + SpinLockAcquire(&vmq->mq_mutex); sender = vmq->mq_sender; - SpinLockRelease(&mq->mq_mutex); + SpinLockRelease(&vmq->mq_mutex); return sender; }
-- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
