From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#36609: 27.0.50; Possible race-condition in threading implementation Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2021 09:00:07 +0300 Message-ID: <83zgvx9c0o.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87muhks3b5.fsf@hochschule-trier.de> <87fsxv8182.fsf@dick> <83wnr7gdd8.fsf@gnu.org> <875yyqg66k.fsf@dick> <83k0n6hjym.fsf@gnu.org> <87wnr2lnsj.fsf@dick> <83h7i6cj3z.fsf@gnu.org> <87bl8e2aya.fsf@dick> <8335tpdcq9.fsf@gnu.org> <87y2bhepl2.fsf@dick> <83y2bhbw14.fsf@gnu.org> <87czstmmgi.fsf@dick> Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="23262"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: 36609@debbugs.gnu.org To: dick.r.chiang@gmail.com Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Fri Jun 11 08:08:01 2021 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1lraKm-0005mw-8B for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 11 Jun 2021 08:08:00 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:45668 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lraKl-0001LR-6l for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 11 Jun 2021 02:07:59 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:38010) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lraE1-0004Hd-UG for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 11 Jun 2021 02:01:02 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:54694) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lraE1-0002In-Js for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 11 Jun 2021 02:01:01 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1lraE1-0007iG-Ig for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 11 Jun 2021 02:01:01 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Eli Zaretskii Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2021 06:01:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 36609 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: fixed Original-Received: via spool by 36609-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B36609.162339122429598 (code B ref 36609); Fri, 11 Jun 2021 06:01:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 36609) by debbugs.gnu.org; 11 Jun 2021 06:00:24 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:38007 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1lraDQ-0007hK-LW for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 11 Jun 2021 02:00:24 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:40040) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1lraDO-0007h7-OK for 36609@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 11 Jun 2021 02:00:23 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:49978) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lraDJ-0001j6-Es; Fri, 11 Jun 2021 02:00:17 -0400 Original-Received: from 84.94.185.95.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.95]:2927 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lraDJ-0004w4-0J; Fri, 11 Jun 2021 02:00:17 -0400 In-Reply-To: <87czstmmgi.fsf@dick> (dick.r.chiang@gmail.com) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "bug-gnu-emacs" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.bugs:208342 Archived-At: > From: dick.r.chiang@gmail.com > Cc: 36609@debbugs.gnu.org > Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2021 17:36:13 -0400 > > EZ> Is it, really? > > Yes. While I can't claim to be any more knowledgeable, the naivete of someone > protesting thread atomicity based on word-size is stunningly apparent. I'm okay with replacing the simple increments and decrements of that variable with atomic ones, using the likes of __atomic_fetch_add intrinsics of GCC, if that solves the problem. Did you try that?