* Robert Osfield -- Tuesday 10 February 2009:
> Any chance that FlightFear is modifying the
> ParticleSystem/ParticleSystemUpdate within the cull traversal?
No idea. Have to check with one of our "osg experts".
> What happens we you try differnt threading models like
> CullDrawThreadPerContext,
Hey,
* Mathias Fröhlich -- Tuesday 10 February 2009:
> I can see no connection between the helgrind warning and a segfault.
> What helgrind tells you, is that there is a possible dealock situation
> that can potentially happen due to that inverted lock order.
> But the effect of a deadlock is a h
An other sidenote regarding valgrind:
For the nvidia drivers on linux you need the --smc-check=all valgrind
argument. The thing appears to be that the nvidia drivers dynamically build
code on the cpu that is not tracked correctly by valgrind without that
argument.
Greetings
Mathias
--
Dr.
Hi,
On Monday 09 February 2009 23:38, Melchior FRANZ wrote:
> * Robert Osfield -- Monday 09 February 2009:
> > An svn update to the OSG-2.8 branch will get you these changes.
>
> Tried with that ...
>
> > Changing to mutex solves the valigrind/helgrind warnings when you run
> > osgparticleeffects
I tried on my application and everything seems good to me
Robert Osfield wrote:
Hi All,
I'm ready to tag the 2.8.0. Feedback on the 2.8 branch and 2.8.0-rc2
has been positive so far, so it looks like the code is pretty ready.
Do you agree/disagree that we are ready to tag? Now is your last
op
Hi Melchoir,
On Mon, Feb 9, 2009 at 10:38 PM, Melchior FRANZ
wrote:
> Confirmed. However, in fgfs I got again a segfault with particles
> and threading ...
>
>
> Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.
> [Switching to Thread 0xb67d16f0 (LWP 32467)]
> osgParticle::ParticleSystemUpdate
* Robert Osfield -- Monday 09 February 2009:
> An svn update to the OSG-2.8 branch will get you these changes.
Tried with that ...
> Changing to mutex solves the valigrind/helgrind warnings when you run
> osgparticleeffects in SingleThreaded.
Confirmed. However, in fgfs I got again a segfault
HI John,
I've finished the other tasks then had a look at this issue. I was
able to track it down to an incorrect for loop end iterator value in
the DatabasePager::getRequestsInProgress(). This is now fixed and the
osgautocapture example works once more.
Robert.
On Mon, Feb 9, 2009 at 9:33 PM,
HI John,
Could you please look into, I have enough on my plate already.
Robert.
On Mon, Feb 9, 2009 at 9:29 PM, John Vidar Larring wrote:
> Hi Robert,
>
> It seems that the osgautocapture example has stopped working along the way.
> It seems that DatabasePager::getRequestsInProgress() returns z
Hi Robert,
It seems that the osgautocapture example has stopped working along the
way. It seems that DatabasePager::getRequestsInProgress() returns zero
even after the terrain model has started loading. Please, test to
reproduce with the osgautocapture example:
./osgautocapture --window 0 0
* Robert Osfield -- Monday 09 February 2009:
> An svn update to the OSG-2.8 branch will get you these changes.
OK. I updated and recompiled, and will now test fgfs intensively.
One evening won't be enough to confirm that the problem is fixed,
but the fact that helgrind no longer complains is a goo
Did you use an OpenThreads::Mutex or ReadWriteMutex in your shared
file cache? As far as I know OpenThreads::Mutex is sound, but
ReadWriteMutex does look unsound as it stands.
Could have been ReadWriteMutex, but not 100% sure. The only sure thing
is that tbb fixed it.
Stefan
___
Hi Melchoir et al.
On Mon, Feb 9, 2009 at 5:00 PM, Melchior FRANZ wrote:
>> Are you around for the rest of the day? Can I push a testing question
>> of new code in your direction?
>
> Yes, and sure. But note that I can't reproduce it with every fgfs run.
> I'd have to run fgfs dozens of times an
Hi Stefan,
On Mon, Feb 9, 2009 at 5:37 PM, Stefan Roettger wrote:
> Just my 2 eurocents: We were using openthreads to lock a crew of worker
> threads which were accessing a shared file cache locked with a mutex. We got
> a crash every once in a while. To check for the problem we changed the code
On Mon, Feb 9, 2009 at 5:16 PM, Robert Osfield wrote:
> I think we have three choices:
>
> 1) Refactor OpenThreads::ReadWriteMutex to fix it.
> 2) Refactor osgParticle::ParticleSystem to use a Mutex instead of a
> ReadWriteMutext.
> 3) Ignore it and fix it after the release.
>
> There are pros
At my end I do have the helgrind output that suggests a problem, but I
don't have a crash, which makes it a bit more difficult for me to
fully diagnose the problem and confirm a fix of the problem. The
helgrind output is just a hint that somewhere in access of the
ReadWriteMutex there is an issue
* Robert Osfield -- Monday 09 February 2009:
> Thanks for the instructions on getting flight gear I'll have bash.
You'd also need the data. And ~2GB free disk space, though you could
leave most aircraft away, which saves a lot:
$ cvs -d :pserver:cvsgu...@cvs.flightgear.org:/var/cvs/FlightGear-0
Hi Melchior,
Thanks for the instructions on getting flight gear I'll have bash.
On Mon, Feb 9, 2009 at 5:00 PM, Melchior FRANZ wrote:
>> I am looking into ways of refactoring this class to fix the potential
>> problems.
>
> That sounds much too dangerous shortly before a release. I'd rather
> lo
* Robert Osfield -- Monday 09 February 2009:
> How easy is it to build FlightGear these days?
Shouldn't be too hard for you, as you probably have a lot of the
necessary components installed already (osg, libpng, libjpg, openal,
alut etc.)
So all you'll need is a decent scene graph lib:;-)
HI Melchior,
On Mon, Feb 9, 2009 at 4:11 PM, Melchior FRANZ wrote:
>> 3rd party debugging tools aren't infaluable. The can and do produce
>> false positives.
>
> Yes, of course. But if I get a segfault in FlightGear which gdb
> traces back to some lines of code in OSG, and then helgrind
> points
Hi,
* Robert Osfield -- Monday 09 February 2009:
> In my testing here I'm using the tool=helgrind
Oh, sorry then.
> 3rd party debugging tools aren't infaluable. The can and do produce
> false positives.
Yes, of course. But if I get a segfault in FlightGear which gdb
traces back to some lines
* Alberto Luaces -- Monday 09 February 2009:
> Did you know that you can also attach a debugger
Yes, of course. But the helgrind output already contained
*exact* line numbers where it found the locking order to
be wrong. There wasn't much point in staring at the lines.
Those by themselves aren't
Hi Robert,
El Lunes 09 Febrero 2009ES 16:56:40 Robert Osfield escribió:
> Hi Alberto,
>
> On Mon, Feb 9, 2009 at 3:54 PM, Alberto Luaces wrote:
> > Did you know that you can also attach a debugger so you can inspect
> > directly every error reported by Valgrind? It is done adding
> > "--db-attach
Hi Alberto,
On Mon, Feb 9, 2009 at 3:54 PM, Alberto Luaces wrote:
> Did you know that you can also attach a debugger so you can inspect directly
> every error reported by Valgrind? It is done adding "--db-attach=yes" to the
> command-line. Maybe the error could be more evident this way without ha
HI Melchoir,
On Mon, Feb 9, 2009 at 3:34 PM, Melchior FRANZ wrote:
> You are aware that I didn't use valgrind's standard tool "mecheck",
> but its threading checker "helgrind"?
In my testing here I'm using the tool=helgrind
>> Do you get a crash in osgparticleeffects? If so how quickly?
>
> No
Hi Melchior,
El Lunes 09 Febrero 2009ES 16:34:45 Melchior FRANZ escribió:
> You are aware that I didn't use valgrind's standard tool "mecheck",
> but its threading checker "helgrind"?
>
> $ valgrind --tool=helgrind ./osgparticleeffects
>
>
> ==31276== Thread #1: lo
* Robert Osfield -- Monday 09 February 2009:
> I've just run valgrind and it generates a number of what it thinks are
> errors,
You are aware that I didn't use valgrind's standard tool "mecheck",
but its threading checker "helgrind"?
$ valgrind --tool=helgrind ./osgparticleeffects
Hi Melchior,
On Mon, Feb 9, 2009 at 2:54 PM, Melchior FRANZ wrote:
> * Robert Osfield -- Monday 09 February 2009:
>> The segfault I saw with your example was because the example was
>> broken as the viewer wasn't ref counted, this wasn't an OSG bug.
>
> But valgrind/helgrind reported a bug in *OS
* Robert Osfield -- Monday 09 February 2009:
> The segfault I saw with your example was because the example was
> broken as the viewer wasn't ref counted, this wasn't an OSG bug.
But valgrind/helgrind reported a bug in *OSG*, in the same
area where FlightGear crashes. I didn't let it run over Flig
Hi Melchior,
On Mon, Feb 9, 2009 at 2:24 PM, Melchior FRANZ wrote:
> you'll probably not be surprised if I say: I disagree. :-)
>
> I had reported a segfault and the diagnose output of valgrind/helgrind,
> which affirms that there is a threading bug (maybe in the particles
> code?). It's very li
Hi Robert,
On Monday 09 February 2009 15:08, Robert Osfield wrote:
> I'm ready to tag the 2.8.0. Feedback on the 2.8 branch and 2.8.0-rc2
> has been positive so far, so it looks like the code is pretty ready.
> Do you agree/disagree that we are ready to tag? Now is your last
> opportunity to re
Hi Paul,
On Mon, Feb 9, 2009 at 2:16 PM, Paul Melis wrote:
> Good ;-)
> BTW, you asked Stephan if he had committed it to the trunk, but I thought
> only you had permission to commit there?
Stephan maintains the XCode project directory in svn/trunk so does
have write permission for this section.
Hi Robert,
I did not test many things but IMHO, and seeing what was posted on mailing
lists, I agree to tag the 2.8.0.
Sukender
PVLE - Lightweight cross-platform game engine - http://pvle.sourceforge.net/
Le Mon, 09 Feb 2009 15:08:40 +0100, Robert Osfield a
écrit:
> Hi All,
>
> I'm ready to
Hi,
* Robert Osfield -- Monday 09 February 2009:
> Do you agree/disagree that we are ready to tag?
you'll probably not be surprised if I say: I disagree. :-)
I had reported a segfault and the diagnose output of valgrind/helgrind,
which affirms that there is a threading bug (maybe in the partic
Robert Osfield wrote:
On Mon, Feb 9, 2009 at 2:10 PM, Paul Melis wrote:
Did you see the message about rev 9722 not being in the branch yet?
It arrived just after I pressed send :-)
So yes have spotted it, currently waiting on the server.
Good ;-)
BTW, you asked Stephan if he had
On Mon, Feb 9, 2009 at 2:10 PM, Paul Melis wrote:
> Did you see the message about rev 9722 not being in the branch yet?
It arrived just after I pressed send :-)
So yes have spotted it, currently waiting on the server.
Robert.
___
osg-users mailing lis
Robert Osfield wrote:
Hi All,
I'm ready to tag the 2.8.0. Feedback on the 2.8 branch and 2.8.0-rc2
has been positive so far, so it looks like the code is pretty ready.
Do you agree/disagree that we are ready to tag? Now is your last
opportunity to report a show stopper!
Did you see the mes
Hi All,
I'm ready to tag the 2.8.0. Feedback on the 2.8 branch and 2.8.0-rc2
has been positive so far, so it looks like the code is pretty ready.
Do you agree/disagree that we are ready to tag? Now is your last
opportunity to report a show stopper!
Unless there is a show stopper reported I'll t
38 matches
Mail list logo
