Liviu Nicoara wrote:
On May 20, 2007, at 11:57 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
Eric Lemings wrote:
Questions for STDCXX users and maintainers regarding Intel Thread
Checker (ITC):
1. Would STDCXX benefit from ITC support?
I don't know :) Does it reveal any problems in our code? Is it worth
the effort? From what I've heard from Liviu it sounds like a quite
a bit of work for not a whole lot of benefit.
The main benefit of this exercise is to eliminate the false positives in
the ITC analysis of the code which uses stdcxx. This is the exactly what
I have avoided in the other libraries in the Core package by using the
ITC synchronization API.
That's a benefit to the users of stdcxx, not the project itself.
Which isn't to say that such a benefit is not unimportant, of
course.
I think it would be good to see examples of bug in our code revealed
by the tool.
I agree it would be a spectacular demonstration of the usefulness of the
tool but -- based on my knowledge of the stdcxx code -- I strongly doubt
I can demonstrate an MT bug in it. Do you know of an unresolved MT bug
in stdcxx?
There is a problem in locale (as usual, sigh :( A couple of our
thread safety tests have been crashing: 22_mt and 22_time_put_mt.
Martin
