From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Ken Raeburn Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.devel,gmane.spam.detected Subject: Re: deadlock in 1.7.91 ? Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2006 14:57:37 -0500 Message-ID: <7CB6664A-0650-4C8A-B753-641A967DCAF5@raeburn.org> References: <20060220133359.GA29968@basalt.office.altlinux.org> <20060226095846.GE14000@basalt.office.altlinux.org> <20060306092721.GD28115@basalt.office.altlinux.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: deer.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v746.2) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1141677478 839 80.91.229.6 (6 Mar 2006 20:37:58 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2006 20:37:58 +0000 (UTC) Cc: guile-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Mar 06 21:37:51 2006 Return-path: Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by deer.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1FGMSk-0002TP-00 for ; Mon, 06 Mar 2006 21:37:51 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FGMSv-000132-P2 for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 06 Mar 2006 15:38:01 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1FGLsJ-0007kF-4u for guile-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 06 Mar 2006 15:00:11 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1FGLsC-0007hE-JV for guile-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 06 Mar 2006 15:00:07 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FGLsB-0007gW-F2 for guile-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 06 Mar 2006 15:00:03 -0500 Original-Received: from [63.240.77.84] (helo=sccrmhc14.comcast.net) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.52) id 1FGLuG-00035j-Sx for guile-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 06 Mar 2006 15:02:13 -0500 Original-Received: from raeburn.org (c-65-96-168-237.hsd1.ma.comcast.net[65.96.168.237]) by comcast.net (sccrmhc14) with ESMTP id <2006030619574301400e4sine>; Mon, 6 Mar 2006 19:57:43 +0000 Original-Received: from [18.18.1.160] (NOME-KING.MIT.EDU [18.18.1.160]) by raeburn.org (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id k26JvgcD007614; Mon, 6 Mar 2006 14:57:42 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: <20060306092721.GD28115@basalt.office.altlinux.org> Original-To: Stanislav Ievlev X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.746.2) X-BeenThere: guile-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Developers list for Guile, the GNU extensibility library" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org X-Spam-Report: 7.9 points; * 0.0 FORGED_RCVD_HELO Received: contains a forged HELO * 0.3 J_CHICKENPOX_71 BODY: {7}Letter - dot - {1}Letter * -0.0 BAYES_44 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 44 to 50% * [score: 0.5000] * 5.0 RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET RBL: Received via a relay in bl.spamcop.net * [Blocked - see ] * 2.6 RCVD_IN_SORBS_DUL RBL: SORBS: sent directly from dynamic IP address * [65.96.168.237 listed in dnsbl.sorbs.net] Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.devel:5756 gmane.spam.detected:1402731 Archived-At: On Mar 6, 2006, at 4:27, Stanislav Ievlev wrote: > On Sun, Feb 26, 2006 at 12:58:46PM +0300, Stanislav Ievlev wrote: >> Hi! >> >> What about this problem? > Problem was in hidden select in g_main_loop (thanks to myself) > > We really need enter_guile(), leave_guile() for such cases. > with-guile/without-guile will not work. > > Are you planning to fix this problem? But scm_leave_guile can result in garbage collection bugs in multithreaded programs. Look in threads.c for a copy of the email message I wrote on the problem. (There may be similar issues with scm_enter_guile, I haven't thought as hard about it.) I doubt this can be fixed with that API, but if you spot something I missed, I'd be glad to hear about it. The list archives seem to be missing some messages at the end of February. Why will with/without-guile not work for you? In the message dated 20 Feb in the archive, can you not call g_main_loop_run via scm_without_guile? Ken _______________________________________________ Guile-devel mailing list Guile-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-devel