Re: [PATCH v2] [Issue #857] Add assert and a condition variable to prevent the next round of barrier-waits from starting before the previous round of barrier-waits completes

Hi Nadav, I looked at your patch and it looks good. I tried running the tests I have been using locally to trigger hangs and it passed - no hangs observed thus far after running a few hundred repeated rounds with between 1 and 100 threads and randomized delays. Feel free to merge. thanks, Rean

Re: [PATCH v2] [Issue #857] Add assert and a condition variable to prevent the next round of barrier-waits from starting before the previous round of barrier-waits completes

Hi Nadav, Your proposal looks simpler than the attached cleanup of an earlier patch. I'll try to reproduce 857 locally and verify your fix. thanks, Rean On 04/09/2017 03:50 PM, Nadav Har'El wrote: > On Sun, Apr 9, 2017 at 5:33 PM, Nadav Har'El wrote: > >> A third alternative to re-implementin

[PATCH] [Issue #857] Add assert and guard to prevent the next round of barrier-waits from starting before the previous round of barrier-waits completes

Hi Nadav, Thanks for the review. More replies inline...[RG] On Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 6:16 AM, Nadav Har'El > wrote: > Were you able to reproduce this problem - perhaps by reducing sleeping in > the test case, or something? > [RG] The root cause is that a thread can start the next round of waitin

Re: [PATCH v5] pthread_barrier*: Add OSv-specific pthread_barrier_init, wait, destroy + test

Hi Nadav, I will take a look. thanks, Rean On Sun, Mar 19, 2017 at 10:30 AM, Nadav Har'El wrote: > > On Fri, Dec 23, 2016 at 6:44 PM, Rean Griffith > wrote: > >> Fixed and resubmitted. >> >> Thanks, >> Rean >> > > Hi, we see sporadic hangs of the pthread_barrier test in - I opeened an > issue

[PATCH] Generalize nodejs build to support recent versions (6.9.5 LTS and 7.5.0 latest)

Signed-off-by: rean --- node/GET | 14 -- node/Makefile| 16 +--- node/hello.js| 16 node/patch-4.1.1 | 45 + node/patch-4.6.1 | 30 ++ node/patch-6.9.1 | 42 ++

Re: [PATCH v5] pthread_barrier*: Add OSv-specific pthread_barrier_init, wait, destroy + test

Fixed and resubmitted. Thanks, Rean On Thursday, December 22, 2016, Nadav Har'El wrote: > Unfortunately, it looks like you fixed the indentation in pthread.cc, but > not in latch.hh? > > > -- > Nadav Har'El > n...@scylladb.com > > On Thu, Dec 22, 2016 at 1:02 AM, 'rean' via OSv Development < >

Re: [PATCH v4] pthread_barrier*: Add OSv-specific pthread_barrier_init, wait, destroy + test

Fixed (re-formatted and resubmitted) , 3-indent is the style from a previous life/company. thanks, Rean On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 2:16 PM, Nadav Har'El wrote: > Sorry for not having spotted this sooner, but is it possible (???) that > your patch uses a 3-space indentation style, while the rest of

Re: [PATCH v3] pthread_barrier*: Add OSv-specific pthread_barrier_init, wait, destroy + test

Hi Nadav, No worries. I've made the changes requested and re-submitted. thanks, Rean On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 12:13 AM, Nadav Har'El wrote: > > On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 8:05 PM, 'rean' via OSv Development < > osv-dev@googlegroups.com> wrote: > >> - pthread_barrier* patch clean up (address revie

Re: [PATCH v2] pthread_barrier*: Add OSv-specific pthread_barrier_init, wait, destroy + test

Thanks for the comments! I used them to revise the patch and re-submitted it. Specifically: - static_asserts replace plain asserts - the confusing comment from latch::reset was removed along with the extraneous lock (latch::reset was also renamed to latch::unsafe_reset and a comment added to indi

Fwd: [PATCH] pthread_barrier*: Add OSv-specific pthread_barrier_init, wait, destroy + test

cc dev list -- Forwarded message -- From: Rean Griffith Date: Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 8:08 AM Subject: Re: [PATCH] pthread_barrier*: Add OSv-specific pthread_barrier_init, wait, destroy + test To: Nadav Har'El Thanks for the review comments! I will make another pass. More replies

Re: [PATCH] ttyname_r/ttyname: Add OSV-specific ttyname_r and ttyname implementation + test - nodejs prep (pt.1) Signed-off-by: rean

Thanks! re: the unnecessary explicit null You're right. re: why the compiler does not complain about that final return statement No clue :) thanks, Rean On Mon, Dec 12, 2016 at 2:02 AM, Nadav Har'El wrote: > Thanks. I committed the patch. Two notes below. > > > -- > Nadav Har'El > n...@scylla

Re: [PATCH] Prep for nodejs 4.6.1, 6.9.1, 7.0.0 and 7.2.0 (they need ttyname_r and stubs for pthread_barrier*)

That's fair. I'll look into a more appropriate OSv-specific implementations for these functions. Thanks, Rean On Thursday, December 8, 2016, Nadav Har'El wrote: > > On Thu, Dec 8, 2016 at 10:01 AM, 'rean' via OSv Development < > osv-dev@googlegroups.com > > wrote: > >> Signed-off-by: rean > >

Re: [PATCH] semaphore::wait: Clean up stack-allocated wait_record on timeout + add test

Hi Nadav, Thanks for the review comments. I will clean up the patch and re-submit tonight. I found this issue while building OSv images for Nodejs v7.0.0 and 7.2.0. The GC in Nodejs 7.x does a semaphore wait-for operation that eventually triggers this issue (/node-7.0.0/deps/v8/src/heap/mark-comp