From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Steve Wise Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] RPING: Make sure CQ event thread exits before destroying the CQ. Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2010 15:56:38 -0500 Message-ID: <4CBF5786.2020203@opengridcomputing.com> References: <20101020192859.1431.68877.stgit@build.ogc.int> <4CBF4D30.3050500@opengridcomputing.com> <20101020203551.GO10362@obsidianresearch.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20101020203551.GO10362-ePGOBjL8dl3ta4EC/59zMFaTQe2KTcn/@public.gmane.org> Sender: linux-rdma-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Jason Gunthorpe Cc: Bart Van Assche , sean.hefty-ral2JQCrhuEAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org, linux-rdma-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org List-Id: linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org On 10/20/2010 03:35 PM, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 10:23:25PM +0200, Bart Van Assche wrote: > > >> Please keep in mind that glibc uses locking internally for many file >> I/O functions, e.g. printf() and fprintf(). >> > POSIX strictly defines what functions are, aren't and could be > cancellation points, yes it is a surprising list. But, glibc won't > break internally if you cancel any of its function calls. It has > cleanup handlers and what not to protect itself. > > rping doesn't hold locks, or allocate memory in the cq_thread, so it > seems OK to me. My main question would be what happens internally to > ibverbs, and does it call any possible cancellation point while holding > locks - is it missing cleanup handlers? Etc. > > Jason > Hey Jason, do you have a pointer to the list of pthread cancellation points for Linux? Steve. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rdma" in the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html