Sorry should send notice, I figured it out later yesterday.
Thanks Ben,
On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 10:48 AM, Ben Pfaff wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 05:19:04PM -0700, Alex Wang wrote:
> > On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 10:47 AM, Ben Pfaff wrote:
> >
> > > @@ -22,59 +22,55 @@
> > > #include
> > >
On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 05:19:04PM -0700, Alex Wang wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 10:47 AM, Ben Pfaff wrote:
>
> > @@ -22,59 +22,55 @@
> > #include
> > #include "ovs-atomic.h"
> > #include "util.h"
> > +
> > +/* Mutex. */
> >
> > struct OVS_LOCKABLE ovs_mutex {
> > pthread_mutex_t lo
On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 10:47 AM, Ben Pfaff wrote:
> @@ -22,59 +22,55 @@
> #include
> #include "ovs-atomic.h"
> #include "util.h"
> +
> +/* Mutex. */
>
> struct OVS_LOCKABLE ovs_mutex {
> pthread_mutex_t lock;
> const char *where;
> };
>
> -struct OVS_LOCKABLE ovs_rwlock {
> -
> Yeah, I understand the rationale, I just want to know whether we can
> make the pointer const.
I'm fine with it. I used the same trick in some other patches, I'll
be sure to update them.
Ethan
X-CudaMail-Whitelist-To: dev@openvswitch.org
___
dev mail
On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 02:10:40PM -0700, Ethan Jackson wrote:
> > In lockfile.c, I guess that clang can only handle guarded-by on
> > pointers? Otherwise I don't see why one would introduce the new
> > lock_table variable as a level of indirection. Assuming that's true,
> > can we declare lock_t
> OVS_RELEASES applies to both read-locks and write-locks?
>
> I guess that an ordinary mutex is considered a write-lock?
Yep, I suppose we could create a second #define for that. Not sure if
it matters or not.
> In lockfile.c, I guess that clang can only handle guarded-by on
> pointers? Otherw
On Fri, Jul 26, 2013 at 06:07:02PM -0700, Ethan Jackson wrote:
> This commit adds annotations for thread safety check. And the
> check can be conducted by using -Wthread-safety flag in clang.
>
> Co-authored-by: Alex Wang
> Signed-off-by: Alex Wang
> Signed-off-by: Ethan Jackson
Currently, the
On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 11:06:55AM -0700, Alex Wang wrote:
> > > +#if __has_feature(c_thread_safety_attributes)
> > > +/* "clang" annotations for thread safety check.
> > > + *
> > > + * OVS_LOCKABLE indicates that the struct contains mutex element
> > > + * which can be locked by ovs_mutex_lock().
On Mon, Jul 29, 2013 at 10:47:47AM -0700, Ben Pfaff wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 26, 2013 at 06:07:02PM -0700, Ethan Jackson wrote:
> > This commit adds annotations for thread safety check. And the
> > check can be conducted by using -Wthread-safety flag in clang.
One additional thought. In reading the a
> > +#if __has_feature(c_thread_safety_attributes)
> > +/* "clang" annotations for thread safety check.
> > + *
> > + * OVS_LOCKABLE indicates that the struct contains mutex element
> > + * which can be locked by ovs_mutex_lock().
> > + *
>
> What does the following sentence mean? I do not underst
On Fri, Jul 26, 2013 at 06:07:02PM -0700, Ethan Jackson wrote:
> This commit adds annotations for thread safety check. And the
> check can be conducted by using -Wthread-safety flag in clang.
I would think that the commit should also explain where to get clang
with this support, probably by adding
11 matches
Mail list logo
