---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/121134/
---
Review request for KDE Software on Mac OS X and kdelibs.
Repository:
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/121134/#review70441
---
as I said before: Did you check whether that is actually the
On Nov. 16, 2014, 3:58 p.m., Milian Wolff wrote:
as I said before: Did you check whether that is actually the case? Did you
add some assertions to see what other thread is calling this code?
I'm not sure whether this is supposed to be threadsafe or not. If it must
be threadsafe,
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/121134/
---
(Updated Nov. 16, 2014, 4:53 p.m.)
Review request for KDE Software on
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/121134/#review70444
---
Do you have a backtrace of the condition?
If there's trouble
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/121134/#review70448
---
kdecore/kernel/kglobal.cpp
On Nov. 16, 2014, 2:58 p.m., Milian Wolff wrote:
as I said before: Did you check whether that is actually the case? Did you
add some assertions to see what other thread is calling this code?
I'm not sure whether this is supposed to be threadsafe or not. If it must
be threadsafe,
On Nov. 16, 2014, 5:28 p.m., Thomas Lübking wrote:
Do you have a backtrace of the condition?
If there's trouble w/ ONE client onnly, i'd rather bet on a client bug (and
KGlobal doesn't mention thread-safetyness)
What you probably can do (as it's reproducible somehow) is to add a
On Nov. 16, 2014, 3:58 p.m., Milian Wolff wrote:
as I said before: Did you check whether that is actually the case? Did you
add some assertions to see what other thread is calling this code?
I'm not sure whether this is supposed to be threadsafe or not. If it must
be threadsafe,
On Nov. 16, 2014, 3:58 p.m., Milian Wolff wrote:
as I said before: Did you check whether that is actually the case? Did you
add some assertions to see what other thread is calling this code?
I'm not sure whether this is supposed to be threadsafe or not. If it must
be threadsafe,
On Nov. 16, 2014, 3:58 p.m., Milian Wolff wrote:
as I said before: Did you check whether that is actually the case? Did you
add some assertions to see what other thread is calling this code?
I'm not sure whether this is supposed to be threadsafe or not. If it must
be threadsafe,
On Nov. 16, 2014, 3:58 p.m., Milian Wolff wrote:
as I said before: Did you check whether that is actually the case? Did you
add some assertions to see what other thread is calling this code?
I'm not sure whether this is supposed to be threadsafe or not. If it must
be threadsafe,
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/121134/
---
(Updated Nov. 16, 2014, 7:55 p.m.)
Review request for KDE Software on
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/121134/
---
(Updated Nov. 16, 2014, 8:01 p.m.)
Review request for KDE Software on
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/121134/#review70463
---
kdecore/kernel/kglobal.cpp
On Nov. 16, 2014, 8:05 p.m., Pino Toscano wrote:
kdecore/kernel/kglobal.cpp, lines 323-324
https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/121134/diff/3/?file=328834#file328834line323
QAtomicInt is not a POD, so it is not safe to be used this way. You
rather need to use the semi-private
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/121134/
---
(Updated Nov. 16, 2014, 8:13 p.m.)
Review request for KDE Software on
On Nov. 16, 2014, 7:05 p.m., Pino Toscano wrote:
kdecore/kernel/kglobal.cpp, lines 323-324
https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/121134/diff/3/?file=328834#file328834line323
QAtomicInt is not a POD, so it is not safe to be used this way. You
rather need to use the semi-private
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/121134/#review70466
---
kdecore/kernel/kglobal.cpp
On Nov. 16, 2014, 2:58 p.m., Milian Wolff wrote:
as I said before: Did you check whether that is actually the case? Did you
add some assertions to see what other thread is calling this code?
I'm not sure whether this is supposed to be threadsafe or not. If it must
be threadsafe,
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/121134/
---
(Updated Nov. 16, 2014, 8:19 p.m.)
Review request for KDE Software on
On Nov. 16, 2014, 8:05 p.m., Pino Toscano wrote:
kdecore/kernel/kglobal.cpp, lines 323-324
https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/121134/diff/3/?file=328834#file328834line323
QAtomicInt is not a POD, so it is not safe to be used this way. You
rather need to use the semi-private
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/121134/#review70468
---
kdecore/kernel/kglobal.cpp
On nov. 16, 2014, 2:58 p.m., Milian Wolff wrote:
as I said before: Did you check whether that is actually the case? Did you
add some assertions to see what other thread is calling this code?
I'm not sure whether this is supposed to be threadsafe or not. If it must
be threadsafe,
On Nov. 16, 2014, 8:22 p.m., Thomas Lübking wrote:
kdecore/kernel/kglobal.cpp, line 343
https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/121134/diff/5/?file=328836#file328836line343
Does this actually make sense?
The result is undefined when used from multiple threads anyway.
On Nov. 16, 2014, 3:58 p.m., Milian Wolff wrote:
as I said before: Did you check whether that is actually the case? Did you
add some assertions to see what other thread is calling this code?
I'm not sure whether this is supposed to be threadsafe or not. If it must
be threadsafe,
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/121134/
---
(Updated Nov. 16, 2014, 8:22 p.m.)
Review request for KDE Software on
On Nov. 16, 2014, 7:22 p.m., Thomas Lübking wrote:
kdecore/kernel/kglobal.cpp, line 343
https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/121134/diff/5/?file=328836#file328836line343
Does this actually make sense?
The result is undefined when used from multiple threads anyway.
On Nov. 16, 2014, 8:22 p.m., Thomas Lübking wrote:
kdecore/kernel/kglobal.cpp, line 343
https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/121134/diff/5/?file=328836#file328836line343
Does this actually make sense?
The result is undefined when used from multiple threads anyway.
On Nov. 16, 2014, 7:22 p.m., Thomas Lübking wrote:
kdecore/kernel/kglobal.cpp, line 343
https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/121134/diff/5/?file=328836#file328836line343
Does this actually make sense?
The result is undefined when used from multiple threads anyway.
On Nov. 16, 2014, 9:29 p.m., David Faure wrote:
kdecore/kernel/kglobal.cpp, line 332
https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/121134/diff/6/?file=328847#file328847line332
Would s_allowQuit.load() compile? I forgot the Qt4 API since it changed
in Qt5.
It would be slightly
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/121134/
---
(Updated Nov. 16, 2014, 10:14 p.m.)
Review request for KDE Software on
On Nov. 16, 2014, 7:22 nachm., Thomas Lübking wrote:
kdecore/kernel/kglobal.cpp, line 343
https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/121134/diff/5/?file=328836#file328836line343
Does this actually make sense?
The result is undefined when used from multiple threads anyway.
On Nov. 16, 2014, 8:22 p.m., Thomas Lübking wrote:
kdecore/kernel/kglobal.cpp, line 343
https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/121134/diff/5/?file=328836#file328836line343
Does this actually make sense?
The result is undefined when used from multiple threads anyway.
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://git.reviewboard.kde.org/r/121134/
---
(Updated Nov. 16, 2014, 9:39 p.m.)
Status
--
This change has been
35 matches
Mail list logo
