On Sat, Oct 25, 2008 at 1:21 PM, Julien Danjou [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is there anything from an outsider that could help?
I've seen this on-and-off again on the hppa-linux port. The issue has,
in my experience, been a compiler problem. My standard operating
procedure is to methodically add
On Mon, Oct 27, 2008 at 10:05 AM, Andrew Haley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I've seen this on-and-off again on the hppa-linux port. The issue has,
in my experience, been a compiler problem. My standard operating
procedure is to methodically add volatile to the atomic.h operations
until it goes
Carlos O'Donell wrote:
On Mon, Oct 27, 2008 at 10:05 AM, Andrew Haley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I've seen this on-and-off again on the hppa-linux port. The issue has,
in my experience, been a compiler problem. My standard operating
procedure is to methodically add volatile to the atomic.h
On Mon, Oct 27, 2008 at 11:27 AM, Andrew Haley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I understand all that, but the question still stands: is the compiler
really moving a memory write past a memory barrier? ISTR we did have
a discussion on gcc-list about that, but it was a while ago and should
now be
At 1210458182 time_t, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
Looking quickly at the code the problem is that LLL_MUTEX_LOCK (mutex)
fails to acquire the mutex. It can be a bug in atomic.h or a bug in the
futexes implementation of the kernel.
It would be nice to have an strace of the problem to see the futex
On Wed, May 07, 2008 at 11:29:49AM +0200, Bastian Blank wrote:
Package: libc6
Version: 2.7-10
Severity: important
On Wed, May 07, 2008 at 09:34:12AM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
the build failure on s390 is unexpected; is it possible to extract a
test case?
| java:
Package: libc6
Version: 2.7-10
Severity: important
On Wed, May 07, 2008 at 09:34:12AM +0200, Matthias Klose wrote:
the build failure on s390 is unexpected; is it possible to extract a
test case?
| java: pthread_mutex_lock.c:71: __pthread_mutex_lock: Assertion
`mutex-__data.__owner == 0'
7 matches
Mail list logo