On 04/08/14 19:59 +0200, Uros Bizjak wrote:
On Mon, Aug 4, 2014 at 7:29 PM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
Uros, would backporting this to the 4.9 branch cause problems for alpha?
No, I don't think so. The problem was identified as glibc bug that was
fixed almost a year ago for 2.18.
I assume since
On Mon, Aug 4, 2014 at 7:29 PM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>> These two tests timeout on alpha-linux-gnu:
>>
>> FAIL: 30_threads/async/forced_unwind.cc execution test
>> WARNING: program timed out.
>> FAIL: 30_threads/packaged_task/forced_unwind.cc execution test
>> WARNING: p
On 16 July 2014 17:22, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 6, 2014 at 4:31 PM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>> On 06/06/14 12:40 +0200, Uros Bizjak wrote:
>>>
>>> On Fri, Jun 6, 2014 at 11:19 AM, Jonathan Wakely
>>> wrote:
On 06/06/14 10:27 +0200, Uros Bizjak wrote:
>
>
> These two
Aha! Thanks for the update, I can cross that one off my TODO list :)
On Fri, Jun 6, 2014 at 4:31 PM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> On 06/06/14 12:40 +0200, Uros Bizjak wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Jun 6, 2014 at 11:19 AM, Jonathan Wakely
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 06/06/14 10:27 +0200, Uros Bizjak wrote:
These two tests timeout on alpha-linux-gnu:
FAIL: 30_t
On 06/06/14 12:40 +0200, Uros Bizjak wrote:
On Fri, Jun 6, 2014 at 11:19 AM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
On 06/06/14 10:27 +0200, Uros Bizjak wrote:
These two tests timeout on alpha-linux-gnu:
FAIL: 30_threads/async/forced_unwind.cc execution test
WARNING: program timed out.
FAIL: 30_threads/pack
On Fri, Jun 6, 2014 at 11:19 AM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> On 06/06/14 10:27 +0200, Uros Bizjak wrote:
>>
>> These two tests timeout on alpha-linux-gnu:
>>
>> FAIL: 30_threads/async/forced_unwind.cc execution test
>> WARNING: program timed out.
>> FAIL: 30_threads/packaged_task/forced_unwind.cc exe
On 06/06/14 10:27 +0200, Uros Bizjak wrote:
These two tests timeout on alpha-linux-gnu:
FAIL: 30_threads/async/forced_unwind.cc execution test
WARNING: program timed out.
FAIL: 30_threads/packaged_task/forced_unwind.cc execution test
WARNING: program timed out.
Sorry about that, I don't know w
Hello!
>> Failing to rethrow a __forced_unwind exception is very bad.
>>
>> This patch ensures we rethrow them in async tasks, and makes the
>> shared state ready with a broken_promise so that waiting threads
>> don't block forever. That seems reasonable to me, does anyone have any
>> better ideas
On 14/05/14 20:37 +0100, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
Failing to rethrow a __forced_unwind exception is very bad.
This patch ensures we rethrow them in async tasks, and makes the
shared state ready with a broken_promise so that waiting threads
don't block forever. That seems reasonable to me, does any
10 matches
Mail list logo