race condition destroying condition variables

Hi - Looks like there's a race condition when we destroy a condition variable. My understanding of the expected behavior is that once all the threads have been signaled (i.e, pthread_cond_broadcast is called), the condition variable can be safely destroyed with pthread_cond_destroy. The problem i

Re: [PATCH] LwIP translator

Joan Lledó, on lun. 18 déc. 2017 19:27:30 +0100, wrote: > 2017-12-18 17:28 GMT+01:00 Samuel Thibault : > > BTW, your lwip code should probably be made BSD-licensed, just like the > > rest of lwip. > > Mmm, I think I don't know what you mean, if I send patches to a > BSD-licensed project, they are

Re: [PATCH] LwIP translator

2017-12-18 17:28 GMT+01:00 Samuel Thibault : > BTW, your lwip code should probably be made BSD-licensed, just like the > rest of lwip. Mmm, I think I don't know what you mean, if I send patches to a BSD-licensed project, they are BSD too, right?

Re: [PATCH] LwIP translator

On 18 Dec 2017, at 17:09, Samuel Thibault wrote: > James Clarke, on lun. 18 déc. 2017 17:06:28 +, wrote: >> On 18 Dec 2017, at 16:28, Samuel Thibault wrote: >>> Joan Lledó, on lun. 18 déc. 2017 17:10:42 +0100, wrote: 2017-12-18 14:46 GMT+01:00 Samuel Thibault : > We need to know what

Re: [PATCH] LwIP translator

James Clarke, on lun. 18 déc. 2017 17:06:28 +, wrote: > On 18 Dec 2017, at 16:28, Samuel Thibault wrote: > > Joan Lledó, on lun. 18 déc. 2017 17:10:42 +0100, wrote: > >> 2017-12-18 14:46 GMT+01:00 Samuel Thibault : > >>> We need to know what is not yet in upstream, what will > >>> eventually g

Re: [PATCH] LwIP translator

On 18 Dec 2017, at 16:28, Samuel Thibault wrote: > Joan Lledó, on lun. 18 déc. 2017 17:10:42 +0100, wrote: >> 2017-12-18 14:46 GMT+01:00 Samuel Thibault : >>> We need to know what is not yet in upstream, what will >>> eventually get to upstream, and what may not get to >>> upstream. >> >> There'r

Re: [PATCH] LwIP translator

Joan Lledó, on lun. 18 déc. 2017 17:10:42 +0100, wrote: > 2017-12-18 14:46 GMT+01:00 Samuel Thibault : > > We need to know what is not yet in upstream, what will > > eventually get to upstream, and what may not get to > > upstream. > > There're also some patches that are in upstream, I think it wo

Re: [PATCH] LwIP translator

2017-12-18 14:46 GMT+01:00 Samuel Thibault : > Ok, but I don't see that base in your repository, the first commit > already has a lot of source code which is not in 2.0.1. Oh, yes. That's because I first imported all lwip 2.0.1 code to my lwip-hurd repository and made many changes there. Then I mo

Re: [PATCH] LwIP translator

Hello, Joan Lledó, on lun. 18 déc. 2017 12:58:35 +0100, wrote: > 2017-12-18 2:32 GMT+01:00 Samuel Thibault : > > Or are you actually based on another lwip? > > Yes, It's based in the version 2.0.1, as I started to work on this > back in February. Ok, but I don't see that base in your repository,

Re: [PATCH] LwIP translator

Hello, 2017-12-18 2:32 GMT+01:00 Samuel Thibault : > Or are you actually based on another lwip? Yes, It's based in the version 2.0.1, as I started to work on this back in February. I plan to upgrade liblwip to the last version in a few months.