On Mon, Feb 15, 2016 at 8:22 PM, Mike Stump <mikest...@comcast.net> wrote: > On Feb 15, 2016, at 3:29 AM, Bernd Edlinger <bernd.edlin...@hotmail.de> wrote: >> And independently of that I am looking at using llvm's test.h framework >> instead >> of gcc's test_barrier.h for gcc-7 soon. > > Here’s to hoping that we don’t back slide on: > > https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-01/msg00436.html > > Did they ever adopt a reliable scheme to test?
Yes, they did. Btw, the pthread_barrier solution did not work on macos as it does not implement pthread_barrier and libpthread.so.0 does not exist. That was replaced with spin loop with usleep(100). That caused spurious "as if synchronized via sleep" messages that broke tests. That was replaced with busy loop. That caused timeouts of weak test bots. That was replaced with loop with sched_yield. That caused tsan trace overflows and "failed to restore stack trace" error messages. And that was replaced with special support in tsan runtime which seems to work in all contexts so far...
