Added Intel Copyright #1
Closed
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
added 3 commits
September 9, 2014 13:41
|
Closing this due to problems in local repo. Will try again shortly |
ghost
closed this
plebioda
referenced
this pull request
in plebioda/pmdk
Nov 3, 2014
common: add exports for all libs in unittest.sh
lplewa
referenced
this pull request
in lplewa/pmdk
Oct 14, 2016
As we have 6 jobs and 4 concurrent threads in Travis our job schedule is presented in the figure below: #1 ====== #2 ====== #3 ======================== #4 ======================== #5 ======================== #6 ====== a new order will look like this: #3 ======================== #4 ======================== #5 ======================== #1 ====== #2 ====== #6 ====== what give us '======' improvement (at the time of this commit it's ~13 min)
krzycz
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 30, 2016
GBuella
added a commit
to GBuella/nvml
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 2, 2017
Use an escaped version of character pmem#1 in the script, used as placeholder for comment sections in the parsed C source file input.
krzycz
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 21, 2017
Scripts must start with #!/usr/bin/env <shell> for portability. Add set -e to top-level scripts. Add use warnings to perl scripts.
gaweinbergi
referenced
this pull request
in gaweinbergi/pmdk
Jul 22, 2017
Scripts must start with #!/usr/bin/env <shell> for portability. Add set -e to top-level scripts. Add use warnings to perl scripts. (This commit removes all previous changes other than the above.)
krzycz
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 18, 2017
Tests #2/#3 are specifically for helgrind/drd tests. Test #1 should never be executed under valgrind, even if force-enabled via command-line options. Ref: pmem/issues#664
krzycz
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 18, 2017
test: disable Valgrind in vmem_multiple_pools #1
GBuella
added a commit
to GBuella/nvml
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 3, 2017
Apparently valgrind just can't handle the way jemalloc
uses mutexes across forks, as demonstrated by this
dummy program:
$ cat dummy.c
pthread_mutex_t dummy = PTHREAD_MUTEX_INITIALIZER;
static void prefork(void)
{
pthread_mutex_lock(&dummy);
}
static void postfork_child(void)
{
pthread_mutexattr_t attr;
if (pthread_mutexattr_init(&attr) != 0)
abort();
if (pthread_mutex_init(&dummy, &attr) != 0) {
pthread_mutexattr_destroy(&attr);
abort();
}
pthread_mutexattr_destroy(&attr);
}
static void postfork_parent(void)
{
pthread_mutex_unlock(&dummy);
}
int main()
{
pthread_atfork(prefork,
postfork_parent, postfork_child);
fork();
pthread_mutex_lock(&dummy);
pthread_mutex_unlock(&dummy);
}
$ cc -pthread dummy.c -o dummy
$ valgrind --tool=helgrind ./dummy 2>&1 | grep holds
==26890== Thread pmem#1: Exiting thread still holds 1 lock
$ valgrind --tool=drd ./dummy 2>&1 | grep -i mutex
==26898== Mutex reinitialization: mutex 0x30a040,
recursion count 1, owner 1.
==26898== at 0x4C385F0: pthread_mutex_init
==26898== mutex 0x30a040 was first observed at:
==26898== at 0x4C390D3: pthread_mutex_lock
==26898== Recursive locking not allowed: mutex 0x30a040,
recursion count 1, owner 1.
==26898== at 0x4C390D3: pthread_mutex_lock
==26898== mutex 0x30a040 was first observed at:
==26898== at 0x4C390D3: pthread_mutex_lock
GBuella
added a commit
to GBuella/nvml
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 3, 2017
Apparently valgrind just can't handle the way jemalloc
uses mutexes across forks, as demonstrated by this
dummy program:
```
$ cat dummy.c
pthread_mutex_t dummy = PTHREAD_MUTEX_INITIALIZER;
static void prefork(void)
{
pthread_mutex_lock(&dummy);
}
static void postfork_child(void)
{
pthread_mutexattr_t attr;
if (pthread_mutexattr_init(&attr) != 0)
abort();
if (pthread_mutex_init(&dummy, &attr) != 0) {
pthread_mutexattr_destroy(&attr);
abort();
}
pthread_mutexattr_destroy(&attr);
}
static void postfork_parent(void)
{
pthread_mutex_unlock(&dummy);
}
int main()
{
pthread_atfork(prefork,
postfork_parent, postfork_child);
fork();
pthread_mutex_lock(&dummy);
pthread_mutex_unlock(&dummy);
}
$ cc -pthread dummy.c -o dummy
$ valgrind --tool=helgrind ./dummy 2>&1 | grep holds
==26890== Thread pmem#1: Exiting thread still holds 1 lock
$ valgrind --tool=drd ./dummy 2>&1 | grep -i mutex
==26898== Mutex reinitialization: mutex 0x30a040, recursion count 1, owner 1.
==26898== at 0x4C385F0: pthread_mutex_init
==26898== mutex 0x30a040 was first observed at:
==26898== at 0x4C390D3: pthread_mutex_lock
==26898== Recursive locking not allowed: mutex 0x30a040, recursion count 1, owner 1.
==26898== at 0x4C390D3: pthread_mutex_lock
==26898== mutex 0x30a040 was first observed at:
==26898== at 0x4C390D3: pthread_mutex_lock
```
GBuella
added a commit
to GBuella/nvml
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 3, 2017
Apparently valgrind just can't handle the way jemalloc
uses mutexes across forks, as demonstrated by this
dummy program:
$ cat dummy.c
~~~~
pthread_mutex_t dummy = PTHREAD_MUTEX_INITIALIZER;
static void prefork(void)
{
pthread_mutex_lock(&dummy);
}
static void postfork_child(void)
{
pthread_mutexattr_t attr;
if (pthread_mutexattr_init(&attr) != 0)
abort();
if (pthread_mutex_init(&dummy, &attr) != 0) {
pthread_mutexattr_destroy(&attr);
abort();
}
pthread_mutexattr_destroy(&attr);
}
static void postfork_parent(void)
{
pthread_mutex_unlock(&dummy);
}
int main()
{
pthread_atfork(prefork,
postfork_parent, postfork_child);
fork();
pthread_mutex_lock(&dummy);
pthread_mutex_unlock(&dummy);
}
~~~~
$ cc -pthread dummy.c -o dummy
$ valgrind --tool=helgrind ./dummy 2>&1 | grep holds
```
==26890== Thread pmem#1: Exiting thread still holds 1 lock
```
$ valgrind --tool=drd ./dummy 2>&1 | grep -i mutex
```
==26898== Mutex reinitialization: mutex 0x30a040, recursion count 1, owner 1.
==26898== at 0x4C385F0: pthread_mutex_init
==26898== mutex 0x30a040 was first observed at:
==26898== at 0x4C390D3: pthread_mutex_lock
==26898== Recursive locking not allowed: mutex 0x30a040, recursion count 1, owner 1.
==26898== at 0x4C390D3: pthread_mutex_lock
==26898== mutex 0x30a040 was first observed at:
==26898== at 0x4C390D3: pthread_mutex_lock
```
GBuella
added a commit
to GBuella/nvml
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 3, 2017
Ref: pmem/issues#639 Ref: pmem/issues#665 Apparently valgrind just can't handle the way jemalloc uses mutexes across forks, as demonstrated by this dummy program: $ cat dummy.c ~~~~ pthread_mutex_t dummy = PTHREAD_MUTEX_INITIALIZER; static void prefork(void) { pthread_mutex_lock(&dummy); } static void postfork_child(void) { pthread_mutexattr_t attr; if (pthread_mutexattr_init(&attr) != 0) abort(); if (pthread_mutex_init(&dummy, &attr) != 0) { pthread_mutexattr_destroy(&attr); abort(); } pthread_mutexattr_destroy(&attr); } static void postfork_parent(void) { pthread_mutex_unlock(&dummy); } int main() { pthread_atfork(prefork, postfork_parent, postfork_child); fork(); pthread_mutex_lock(&dummy); pthread_mutex_unlock(&dummy); } ~~~~ $ cc -pthread dummy.c -o dummy $ valgrind --tool=helgrind ./dummy 2>&1 | grep holds ``` ==26890== Thread pmem#1: Exiting thread still holds 1 lock ``` $ valgrind --tool=drd ./dummy 2>&1 | grep -i mutex ``` ==26898== Mutex reinitialization: mutex 0x30a040, recursion count 1, owner 1. ==26898== at 0x4C385F0: pthread_mutex_init ==26898== mutex 0x30a040 was first observed at: ==26898== at 0x4C390D3: pthread_mutex_lock ==26898== Recursive locking not allowed: mutex 0x30a040, recursion count 1, owner 1. ==26898== at 0x4C390D3: pthread_mutex_lock ==26898== mutex 0x30a040 was first observed at: ==26898== at 0x4C390D3: pthread_mutex_lock ```
GBuella
added a commit
to GBuella/nvml
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 3, 2017
Ref: pmem/issues#639 Ref: pmem/issues#665 Apparently valgrind just can't handle the way jemalloc uses mutexes across forks, as demonstrated by this dummy program: $ cat dummy.c pthread_mutex_t dummy = PTHREAD_MUTEX_INITIALIZER; static void prefork(void) { pthread_mutex_lock(&dummy); } static void postfork_child(void) { pthread_mutexattr_t attr; if (pthread_mutexattr_init(&attr) != 0) abort(); if (pthread_mutex_init(&dummy, &attr) != 0) { pthread_mutexattr_destroy(&attr); abort(); } pthread_mutexattr_destroy(&attr); } static void postfork_parent(void) { pthread_mutex_unlock(&dummy); } int main() { pthread_atfork(prefork, postfork_parent, postfork_child); fork(); pthread_mutex_lock(&dummy); pthread_mutex_unlock(&dummy); } $ cc -pthread dummy.c -o dummy $ valgrind --tool=helgrind ./dummy 2>&1 | grep holds ==26890== Thread pmem#1: Exiting thread still holds 1 lock $ valgrind --tool=drd ./dummy 2>&1 | grep -i mutex ==26898== Mutex reinitialization: mutex 0x30a040, recursion count 1, owner 1. ==26898== at 0x4C385F0: pthread_mutex_init ==26898== mutex 0x30a040 was first observed at: ==26898== at 0x4C390D3: pthread_mutex_lock ==26898== Recursive locking not allowed: mutex 0x30a040, recursion count 1, owner 1. ==26898== at 0x4C390D3: pthread_mutex_lock ==26898== mutex 0x30a040 was first observed at: ==26898== at 0x4C390D3: pthread_mutex_lock
igchor
pushed a commit
to igchor/pmdk
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 5, 2018
Tests pmem#2/pmem#3 are specifically for helgrind/drd tests. Test pmem#1 should never be executed under valgrind, even if force-enabled via command-line options. Ref: pmem/issues#664
igchor
pushed a commit
to igchor/pmdk
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 5, 2018
Ref: pmem/issues#639 Ref: pmem/issues#665 Apparently valgrind just can't handle the way jemalloc uses mutexes across forks, as demonstrated by this dummy program: $ cat dummy.c pthread_mutex_t dummy = PTHREAD_MUTEX_INITIALIZER; static void prefork(void) { pthread_mutex_lock(&dummy); } static void postfork_child(void) { pthread_mutexattr_t attr; if (pthread_mutexattr_init(&attr) != 0) abort(); if (pthread_mutex_init(&dummy, &attr) != 0) { pthread_mutexattr_destroy(&attr); abort(); } pthread_mutexattr_destroy(&attr); } static void postfork_parent(void) { pthread_mutex_unlock(&dummy); } int main() { pthread_atfork(prefork, postfork_parent, postfork_child); fork(); pthread_mutex_lock(&dummy); pthread_mutex_unlock(&dummy); } $ cc -pthread dummy.c -o dummy $ valgrind --tool=helgrind ./dummy 2>&1 | grep holds ==26890== Thread pmem#1: Exiting thread still holds 1 lock $ valgrind --tool=drd ./dummy 2>&1 | grep -i mutex ==26898== Mutex reinitialization: mutex 0x30a040, recursion count 1, owner 1. ==26898== at 0x4C385F0: pthread_mutex_init ==26898== mutex 0x30a040 was first observed at: ==26898== at 0x4C390D3: pthread_mutex_lock ==26898== Recursive locking not allowed: mutex 0x30a040, recursion count 1, owner 1. ==26898== at 0x4C390D3: pthread_mutex_lock ==26898== mutex 0x30a040 was first observed at: ==26898== at 0x4C390D3: pthread_mutex_lock
PietrasMaciej
pushed a commit
to PietrasMaciej/pmdk
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 14, 2018
Update personal fork with original master
marcinslusarz
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 23, 2019
test (py): generalize obj_basic_integration
kswiecicki
referenced
this pull request
in kswiecicki/pmdk
Jun 3, 2022
common: remove unused include in libpmem2 meson dependency
This pull request was closed.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
doc: Added a line with an Intel Copyright