1.7.15-1: pthread_cancel and pthread_kill not working as expected
Corinna Vinschen
corinna-cygwin@cygwin.com
Mon May 21 10:47:00 GMT 2012
On May 21 12:26, Otto Meta wrote:
> > You should always try the most recent http://cygwin.com/snapshots.
>
> Thanks for the suggestion, that did indeed change something: The tests
> yield the same half-broken behaviour for pthread_cancel as with 1.7.7
> and 1.7.9. Thatâs better than the almost completely broken behaviour
> from 1.7.12-1 to 1.7.15-1. pthread_kill is still as unreliable as in
> 1.7.12-1 and newer, though.
>
> Results with cygwin1-20120517.dll:
>
> Test 1:
> Blocking on semaphore: Works
> Blocking on pause(): Works
> Blocking on read(): Not deterministic: One thread is killed, the other
> two stay
>
> Test 2:
> Independent of what the threads are blocked on, nothing is cancelled.
>
> Test 3:
> Blocking on semaphore: May or may not signal the correct thread.
> Blocking on pause(): Same as semaphore.
> Blocking on read(): One thread executes the signal handler, the other
> two don't. Thread chosen seemingly at random.
>
> Test 4:
> Not deterministic: Targeted thread either executes the signal handler
> every time or not at all.
>
> Test 5:
> Not deterministic: Threads may or may not exit after being poked.
>
> Test 6:
> Not deterministic: Threads may or may not exit after being poked.
>
> In short:
> - Deferred pthread_cancel seems to work.
> - Asynchronous pthtread_cancel seems to have no effect.
> - pthread_kill is basically hit or miss.
Would you mind to provide *simple* testcases to allow easy debugging
of your observations?
Thanks,
Corinna
--
Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Project Co-Leader cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Red Hat
--
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
More information about the Cygwin
mailing list