Date: Thu, 19 Aug 1999 18:26:37 +0000 (GMT) From: Alfred Perlstein <bright@wintelcom.net> To: Daniel Eischen <eischen@vigrid.com> Cc: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, jb@FreeBSD.org, cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/lib/libc_r/uthread uthread_kern.c Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.05.9908191824230.6392-100000@fw.wintelcom.net> In-Reply-To: <199908191954.PAA09532@pcnet1.pcnet.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, 19 Aug 1999, Daniel Eischen wrote: > > I'm not too sure, the checking of overflow that was there previously was > > insufficient, i've talked to the person experiancing the bug and they > > don't use pthread_cond_timedwait, and i doubt that they are using > > sleep and/or select. > > Well, given two _valid_ timespecs, it should be sufficient. Perhaps > we've got a bug in a timespec/timeval computation internal to libc_r. > If so, it should be fixed. If it's coming from an external interface, > then an appropriate error should be returned. > > I hate to cover things up. This is FreeBSD, aren't we suppose to be > *annoyingly* correct? ;-) I'm going to look at it more, specifically that while loop you posted about, however given that you and John are much more familiar with it, your continued help and guidance would be much appreciated. I'll keep this case open in my book for now. Thank you, -Alfred To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.05.9908191824230.6392-100000>