From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:41401) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hQYc9-0004tb-9f for guix-patches@gnu.org; Tue, 14 May 2019 10:41:12 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hQYc5-0005FL-QP for guix-patches@gnu.org; Tue, 14 May 2019 10:41:09 -0400 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:36037) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hQYc4-0005E1-2L for guix-patches@gnu.org; Tue, 14 May 2019 10:41:04 -0400 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1hQYc2-0000Pe-6P for guix-patches@gnu.org; Tue, 14 May 2019 10:41:03 -0400 Subject: [bug#35666] [PATCH 0/2] Build a thread-safe hdf5 library Resent-Message-ID: From: Eric Bavier Date: Tue, 14 May 2019 14:40:35 +0000 Message-ID: References: <20190510095630.16695-1-ludo@gnu.org> <87imuisf05.fsf@elephly.net> <87d0kq1mr2.fsf@gnu.org> , <8736lh4hro.fsf@gnu.org> In-Reply-To: <8736lh4hro.fsf@gnu.org> Content-Language: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-patches-bounces+kyle=kyleam.com@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-patches" To: Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= Cc: "35666@debbugs.gnu.org" <35666@debbugs.gnu.org>, "pgarlick@tourbillion-technology.com" > I=92m not sure I understand. Do you mean that, just because you use the > C++ API instead of the C API, the library is not thread-safe? The thread-safety of the C++ interface itself is not guaranteed/"supported"= . > They do see crashes vanish when using the library compiled with > =91--enable-threadsafe=92, and reliably so. Great. I'm not familiar enough with the C++ interface code to say which ar= eas might cause problems in a threaded context. It's likely that whatever = problems they were seeing before was not at the interface layer but deeper. Eric Bavier, Scientific Libraries, Cray Inc. ________________________________________ From: Ludovic Court=E8s Sent: Tuesday, May 14, 2019 02:28 To: Eric Bavier Cc: Ricardo Wurmus; 35666@debbugs.gnu.org; pgarlick@tourbillion-technology.= com Subject: Re: [bug#35666] [PATCH 0/2] Build a thread-safe hdf5 library Hi Eric, Eric Bavier skribis: > I think this should be fine, though I've not heard of anyone who has > relied on this feature. The "unsupported" part here is that the posix > lock used for thread-safety is not hoisted into the higher-level API > calls. So if your colleague is using the C++ interface and expecting > thread-safety, they are out of luck. So the disclaimer is that only > the low-level C interface gains thread-safety, and the rest are no > better. I=92m not sure I understand. Do you mean that, just because you use the C++ API instead of the C API, the library is not thread-safe? They do see crashes vanish when using the library compiled with =91--enable-threadsafe=92, and reliably so. Thanks, Ludo=92.