https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=108409
Mike Crowe changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mac at mcrowe dot com
--- Comment #7 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58931
Mike Crowe changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mac at mcrowe dot com
--- Comment #6 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93542
Mike Crowe changed:
What|Removed |Added
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Status|ASSIGNED
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91486
--- Comment #11 from Mike Crowe ---
Created attachment 49305
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=49305&action=edit
Small fix to f9ddb696a289cc48d24d3d23c0b324cb88de9573
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91486
--- Comment #10 from Mike Crowe ---
Unfortunately https://gcc.gnu.org/g:f9ddb696a289cc48d24d3d23c0b324cb88de9573
mentioned in comment 9 contains a small bug (all my fault) that Jonathan
pointed out in
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/libstdc++/2020-
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=93542
--- Comment #2 from Mike Crowe ---
An updated version of the fix is available in
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/libstdc++/2020-May/050433.html which relies on
https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/libstdc++/2020-May/050439.html .
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91486
--- Comment #8 from Mike Crowe ---
I think that https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/libstdc++/2020-May/050437.html fixes
this for std::future::wait_for including the __chrono_detail part mentioned in
comment 5.
: libstdc++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: mac at mcrowe dot com
Target Milestone: ---
std::future::wait_for calls __atomic_futex_unsigned._M_load_when_equal_for
which calculates an absolute time measured against std::chrono::system_clock.
This results in the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91486
Mike Crowe changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mac at mcrowe dot com
--- Comment #7 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78237
--- Comment #4 from Mike Crowe ---
v2 series posted at https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/libstdc++/2019-10/msg00055.html .
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78237
Mike Crowe changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |10.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91906
Mike Crowe changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |10.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91906
--- Comment #2 from Mike Crowe ---
v2 series posted at https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/libstdc++/2019-10/msg00055.html .
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91906
--- Comment #1 from Mike Crowe ---
Proposed fix for std::timed_mutex and std::shared_timed_mutex in series posted
for review at https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2019-09/msg01646.html .
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78237
--- Comment #3 from Mike Crowe ---
Proposed fix for std::timed_mutex and std::shared_timed_mutex in series posted
for review at https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2019-09/msg01646.html .
: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: libstdc++
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: mac at mcrowe dot com
Target Milestone: ---
The clock-agnostic overload of std::timed_mutex::try_lock_until may return
false before the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=78237
Mike Crowe changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mac at mcrowe dot com
--- Comment #1 from
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41861
--- Comment #18 from Mike Crowe ---
(In reply to Mike Crowe from comment #17)
> In https://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/2019-02/msg00637.html , I proposed
> the addition of the pthread_cond_clockwait function (among others) to glibc,
> and whilst
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41861
--- Comment #17 from Mike Crowe ---
In https://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/2019-02/msg00637.html , I proposed the
addition of the pthread_cond_clockwait function (among others) to glibc, and
whilst there are a few comments on the patches, there'
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41861
--- Comment #15 from Mike Crowe ---
(In reply to Mike Crowe from comment #14)
> I submitted an RFC glibc patch last year:
> http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/glibc/list/?submitter=66786
I submitted an updated version earlier this year:
https
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41861
--- Comment #14 from Mike Crowe ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #13)
> (In reply to Roman Fietze from comment #12)
> > Sorry if it is inappropriate to ask for any changes, but how can it be, that
> > there is no fix for this bug for
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41861
--- Comment #10 from Mike Crowe ---
(In reply to Mike Crowe from comment #9)
> 3. condition_variable should support wait_until using at least steady_clock
> (CLOCK_MONOTONIC) and system_clock (CLOCK_REALTIME.) Relative wait
> operations should us
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41861
--- Comment #9 from Mike Crowe ---
It seems that there's been lots of talk about this but no firm solution. Here's
some interesting links:
http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2009/n2999.html
http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59970
--- Comment #4 from Mike Crowe ---
The test case in comment #3 shows the same problem in gcc-5-branch r222333.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59970
Mike Crowe changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||mac at mcrowe dot com
--- Comment #3 from
25 matches
Mail list logo
