On Tue, May 6, 2014 at 12:18 AM, Stefan Fuhrmann < stefan.fuhrm...@wandisco.com> wrote:
> On Mon, May 5, 2014 at 2:06 PM, Stefan Sperling <s...@elego.de> wrote: > >> On Fri, May 02, 2014 at 02:07:40PM -0000, stef...@apache.org wrote: >> > Author: stefan2 >> > Date: Fri May 2 14:07:40 2014 >> > New Revision: 1591919 >> > >> > URL: http://svn.apache.org/r1591919 >> > Log: >> > APR mutexes don't support recursive locking on all platforms. >> > As a result, trying to take out the same lock twice in the >> > same thread will cause a lock up under e.g. Linux. This patch >> > adds an option to svn_mutex__t that detects recursive locking >> > attempts in most cases and returns a proper error. >> >> > * subversion/tests/libsvn_fs_fs/fs-fs-pack-test.c >> > (never_reached, >> > lock_again): Callback functions required by the new test. >> > (recursive_locking): New test expecting an SVN_ERR_RECURSIVE_LOCK. >> > (test_funcs): Register the new test. >> >> Hi Stefan, >> >> This new test fails on the bb-openbsd bot. >> >> http://ci.apache.org/builders/bb-openbsd/builds/12/steps/Test/logs/faillog-ra_local-fsfs >> >> Can you please look into this? >> >> Note that the bot is deliberately compiling APR and everything else >> without support for threads. Perhaps the test or other code doesn't >> take this possibility into account? >> > > Since double locking attempts on the same file > may be problem even without threading support, > we should detect recursive mutex locks there > as well. r1592640 may do the trick. Could not > test it, though. > I see that it is still failing on the buildbot and I have no clue as to why. When I hard-code APR_HAS_THREADS to 0, the test still passes (using the alternative code path). All I found was a consistency edge case which did not effect the outcome of the tests. Fixed in r1592763. -- Stefan^2.
