| [Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] |
Answers pleaaaaaaaaaaase -----Original Message----- From: Ajay Bansal Sent: Friday, March 07, 2003 3:11 PM To: redhat-devel-list@redhat.com Subject: RE: pthread_mutex_lock call hangs But IS THAT POSSIBLE?? I mean that release mode binaries do not report a deadlock?? Only difference between two build is of "-g" flag. There is no extra code written in speacial debug flags (e.g DEBUG or _DEBUG" in MY CODE. -----Original Message----- From: Don Dade [mailto:ddade@digitalstatecraft.com] Sent: Friday, March 07, 2003 12:20 AM To: redhat-devel-list@redhat.com Subject: Re: pthread_mutex_lock call hangs Hi Ajay, This is the normal sequence for LinuxThreads pthread_mutex_lock(). I would guess that you've got a very subtle bug that is causing a deadlock when you compile and run with debugging turned on. I'd go through the code and find all the possible ways in which you could have nested mutex locks, and see if you find any two sequences that contain a pair in reversed order. These will be the potential deadlocks. Or, if it's feasible, could you put a cout around all your locks and unlocks to see what two mutices are deadlocked? It sure sounds like a deadlock, not something wrong with the call. HTH, Don Ajay Bansal writes: > may be somebody over here can answer this > > -----Original Message----- > From: Ajay Bansal > Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2003 9:36 PM > To: gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org > Subject: pthread_mutex_lock call hangs > > > Hi All > > I am on RH73, gcc 3.2.1 > > I have a scenario in which, only if the code is in debug mode, > pthread_mutex_lock call hangs. following is the trace given by pstack > command. > > 0x420292e5: __sigsuspend + 0x21 (bfffd52c, 20, bfffd52c, 404e3ef5, > 10000, 10) + 90 > 0x404d7679: __pthread_wait_for_restart_signal + 0x59 (404e00a0, > 402f6b14, 402ee2c4, 404d945e, 18, 40c4ecc4) + 50 > 0x404d94b9: __pthread_alt_lock + 0x69 (8100108, 0, 402c2234, 404d60be, > 0, 4000b022) + 10 > 0x404d6116: __pthread_mutex_lock + 0x66 (81000f8, 400, 40ac7bac, 400, > 403401ea, 4036e170) > > What could be the reason. Please note that the code works great if has > been built in the release mode. > > TIA > Ajay Bansal > > _______________________________________________ Redhat-devel-list mailing list Redhat-devel-list@redhat.com https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-devel-list _______________________________________________ Redhat-devel-list mailing list Redhat-devel-list@redhat.com https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-devel-list _______________________________________________ Redhat-devel-list mailing list Redhat-devel-list@redhat.com https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-devel-list