# New Ticket Created by Richard Hainsworth
# Please include the string: [perl #120956]
# in the subject line of all future correspondence about this issue.
# https://rt.perl.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=120956 >
The following snippet illustrates code that
a) compiles correctly
b) works without
On Sat, Dec 21, 2013 at 08:45:49PM +, Nicholas Clark wrote:
> ==11811== Thread #1: Attempt to re-lock a non-recursive lock I already hold
> ==11811==at 0x4C2BFC1: pthread_mutex_lock (hg_intercepts.c:484)
> ==11811==by 0x4FACB40: uv_mutex_lock (thread.c:69)
> ==11811==by 0x4F62F87:
As part of being terribly greedy by trying to deny everyone else the pleasure
of finding an GC bugs I've been running with a somewhat stronger write
barrier, specifically checking that the assignee pointer is not in fromspace.
(and hence stale)
I actually made it abort(), because when I tried usin
Hi,
On 1/9/2014 22:00, Nicholas Clark wrote:
On Sat, Dec 21, 2013 at 08:45:49PM +, Nicholas Clark wrote:
==11811== Thread #1: Attempt to re-lock a non-recursive lock I already hold
==11811==at 0x4C2BFC1: pthread_mutex_lock (hg_intercepts.c:484)
==11811==by 0x4FACB40: uv_mutex_lock
On Thu, Jan 09, 2014 at 10:32:37PM +0100, Jonathan Worthington wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 1/9/2014 22:00, Nicholas Clark wrote:
> > I've been running with the appended for a few weeks now, and I think that
> > it's the right fix.
> Unfortunately, releasing the mutex at this point leads to a race
> cond
On 1/9/2014 22:40, Nicholas Clark wrote:
On Thu, Jan 09, 2014 at 10:32:37PM +0100, Jonathan Worthington wrote:
Hi,
On 1/9/2014 22:00, Nicholas Clark wrote:
I've been running with the appended for a few weeks now, and I think that
it's the right fix.
Unfortunately, releasing the mutex at this
