00:10:26 erikc [~erikc@CPE00222d53fe78-CM00222d53fe75.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com] has joined #ccl 00:24:04 sesuncedu [~Adium@cpe-076-182-016-061.nc.res.rr.com] has joined #ccl 00:56:20 pbgc [~pbgc@bl20-162-237.dsl.telepac.pt] has joined #ccl 00:59:25 -!- pbgc [~pbgc@bl20-162-237.dsl.telepac.pt] has quit [Client Quit] 00:59:54 -!- sesuncedu [~Adium@cpe-076-182-016-061.nc.res.rr.com] has quit [Quit: Leaving.] 01:13:56 can I trust ccl::semaphore to not be the source of the bug? (I assume I can) 02:05:46 alms_ [~alms_@209-6-130-32.c3-0.bkl-ubr1.sbo-bkl.ma.cable.rcn.com] has joined #ccl 02:25:22 -!- alms_ [~alms_@209-6-130-32.c3-0.bkl-ubr1.sbo-bkl.ma.cable.rcn.com] has quit [Quit: alms_] 02:53:22 could printing backtraces itself interfere with semaphores or locks? 02:54:16 is it okay to call condition-notify from inside a lock? (if not why not?...) 02:54:21 is there anything wrong with releasing a lock and reacquiring it inside a with-lock-grabbed? 03:05:16 -!- bhyde [~bhyde@c-24-61-81-138.hsd1.ma.comcast.net] has quit [Quit: bhyde] 03:06:15 1. Semaphores are basically OS kernel objects and shouldn't affect userspace. 03:06:46 2. No. 03:07:03 3. What's CONDITION-NOTIFY ? 03:07:46 4. It's probably cleaner to just use WITH-LOCK-GRABBED twice. 03:09:26 condition-wait and condition-notify are a method of using a lock and a semaphore 03:09:37 Defined by Bordeaux Threads 03:10:58 Then the correct answer to 3 would be "who knows ? I certainly don't ..." 03:11:23 IIRC, the correct way to use condition-notify is to ALWAYS acquire the lock. Likewise with condition-wait 03:11:50 but I may be misremembering. Best to find some docs 03:22:26 http://www.sbcl.org/manual/Waitqueue_002fcondition-variables.html 03:22:41 Yes, you hold the lock while calling both condition-notify and condition-wait 03:23:46 However, it appears that the bordeaux threads implementation of condition-wait for CCL doesn't not ATOMICALLY release the lock and wait on teh semaphore 03:24:29 Don't know if that is important 03:26:43 How about some other lock ? Thread A holds lock X and waits for lock Y; thread B holds lock Y and waits for lock X. Nothing's going to prevent you from doing that except having to debug the resulting deadlock. 03:27:11 Certainly no problem except deadlock with holding another lock at that time 03:29:35 sesuncedu [~Adium@cpe-076-182-016-061.nc.res.rr.com] has joined #ccl 03:53:17 -!- patrickwonders [~patrickwo@user-38q42ns.cable.mindspring.com] has quit [Quit: patrickwonders] 03:56:02 patrickwonders [~patrickwo@user-38q42ns.cable.mindspring.com] has joined #ccl 04:30:48 -!- rme [~rme@50.43.190.179] has quit [Quit: rme] 04:45:29 -!- DataLinkDroid [~DataLinkD@1.129.113.189] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 05:18:06 bordeaux-threads:condition-wait releases the lock waits on the semaphore, grabs the lock again -- isn't there an atomicity issue here that could be causing the deadlock? 05:18:32 bt:condition-notify just does a ccl:signal-semaphore 05:21:47 I suspect that bordeaux threads is broken. I see that the sbcl internal implementation is quite complex. 05:28:21 -!- FareWell [fare@nat/google/x-jiitjtoejvmuicbw] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds] 05:29:00 -!- Fare [fare@nat/google/x-vxhujkdaqqclvbzb] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds] 05:29:56 -!- erikc [~erikc@CPE00222d53fe78-CM00222d53fe75.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com] has quit [Quit: erikc] 05:34:06 DataLinkDroid [~DataLinkD@1.129.113.189] has joined #ccl 05:36:34 erikc [~erikc@CPE00222d53fe78-CM00222d53fe75.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com] has joined #ccl 05:36:51 I don't know. I think the semaphores in CCL take care of the atomicity needed, Fare. 14:22:15 ccl-logbot [~ccl-logbo@setf.clozure.com] has joined #ccl 14:22:15 14:22:15 -!- names: ccl-logbot rme bhyde FareWell Fare alms_ sesuncedu jdz billstclair |3b| gz patrickwonders sellout- photex PuffTheMagic dented42 Vivitron gbyers pjb ivan`` brucem mdc_mobile fe[nl]ix Krystof deleuz asedeno xristos oGMo jasom peccu1 @ChanServ mdc 14:25:03 erikc [~erikc@209.20.28.194] has joined #ccl 15:17:01 -!- bhyde [~bhyde@c-24-61-81-138.hsd1.ma.comcast.net] has quit [Quit: bhyde] 15:28:21 -!- sesuncedu [~Adium@cpe-076-182-016-061.nc.res.rr.com] has left #ccl 15:39:54 -!- Vivitron [~Vivitron@pool-98-110-213-33.bstnma.fios.verizon.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 15:46:22 -!- dented42 [~dented42@opengroove.org] has quit [Read error: Operation timed out] 15:53:31 mc40 [~mc@host86-148-31-142.range86-148.btcentralplus.com] has joined #ccl 16:14:57 -!- Fare [~fare@173-9-65-97-NewEngland.hfc.comcastbusiness.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds] 16:15:14 -!- FareWell [~fare@173-9-65-97-NewEngland.hfc.comcastbusiness.net] has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds] 16:29:41 -!- mc40 [~mc@host86-148-31-142.range86-148.btcentralplus.com] has quit [Quit: mc40] 16:34:30 mc40 [~mc@host86-148-31-142.range86-148.btcentralplus.com] has joined #ccl 16:47:25 bhyde [~bhyde@c-76-118-23-40.hsd1.ma.comcast.net] has joined #ccl 17:02:47 FareWell [fare@nat/google/x-pxeahkxnkmddmtap] has joined #ccl 17:03:18 Fare [fare@nat/google/x-vxecjdrtquwcoyuh] has joined #ccl 17:07:00 -!- alms_ [~alms_@209-6-130-32.c3-0.bkl-ubr1.sbo-bkl.ma.cable.rcn.com] has quit [Quit: alms_] 17:13:14 -!- mc40 [~mc@host86-148-31-142.range86-148.btcentralplus.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds] 17:17:31 mc40 [~mc@host86-148-31-142.range86-148.btcentralplus.com] has joined #ccl 17:27:26 alms_ [~alms_@173-162-137-153-NewEngland.hfc.comcastbusiness.net] has joined #ccl 17:41:41 -!- mc40 [~mc@host86-148-31-142.range86-148.btcentralplus.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds] 17:44:38 mc40 [~mc@dab-bhx1-h-1-5.dab.02.net] has joined #ccl 17:46:24 -!- mc40 [~mc@dab-bhx1-h-1-5.dab.02.net] has quit [Client Quit] 17:47:28 -!- bhyde [~bhyde@c-76-118-23-40.hsd1.ma.comcast.net] has quit [Quit: bhyde] 17:50:55 mc40 [~mc@dab-bhx1-h-67-1.dab.02.net] has joined #ccl 18:23:28 -!- erikc [~erikc@209.20.28.194] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds] 18:27:18 bhyde [~bhyde@c-24-61-81-138.hsd1.ma.comcast.net] has joined #ccl 18:31:12 -!- mc40 [~mc@dab-bhx1-h-67-1.dab.02.net] has quit [Remote host closed the connection] 18:38:04 -!- bhyde [~bhyde@c-24-61-81-138.hsd1.ma.comcast.net] has quit [Quit: bhyde] 18:41:58 bhyde [~bhyde@c-24-61-81-138.hsd1.ma.comcast.net] has joined #ccl 19:16:58 -!- bhyde [~bhyde@c-24-61-81-138.hsd1.ma.comcast.net] has quit [Quit: bhyde] 20:05:45 bhyde [~bhyde@c-24-61-81-138.hsd1.ma.comcast.net] has joined #ccl 20:12:31 -!- Fare [fare@nat/google/x-vxecjdrtquwcoyuh] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds] 20:12:48 -!- FareWell [fare@nat/google/x-pxeahkxnkmddmtap] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds] 20:39:37 -!- bhyde [~bhyde@c-24-61-81-138.hsd1.ma.comcast.net] has quit [Quit: bhyde] 20:47:55 erikc [~erikc@CPE00222d53fe78-CM00222d53fe75.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com] has joined #ccl 20:55:16 jsj [~johan@unaffiliated/jsj] has joined #ccl 20:56:52 -!- rme [rme@6D10F4DD.4CC8819B.699BA7A6.IP] has quit [Quit: rme] 20:56:52 -!- rme [~rme@50.43.190.179] has quit [Quit: rme] 21:08:33 -!- alms_ [~alms_@173-162-137-153-NewEngland.hfc.comcastbusiness.net] has quit [Quit: alms_] 21:22:08 francisII [4f0c5c6f@gateway/web/freenode/ip.79.12.92.111] has joined #ccl 21:22:20 hello 21:23:02 someone want to answer to a few my question? 21:28:31 goodbye 21:28:38 -!- francisII [4f0c5c6f@gateway/web/freenode/ip.79.12.92.111] has quit [Quit: Page closed] 22:22:31 bhyde [~bhyde@c-24-61-81-138.hsd1.ma.comcast.net] has joined #ccl 22:23:07 rme [~rme@50.43.190.179] has joined #ccl 22:23:33 -!- erikc [~erikc@CPE00222d53fe78-CM00222d53fe75.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com] has quit [Quit: erikc] 22:34:43 dented42 [~dented42@opengroove.org] has joined #ccl 23:00:00 mc40 [~mc@host86-148-31-142.range86-148.btcentralplus.com] has joined #ccl 23:24:29 -!- bhyde [~bhyde@c-24-61-81-138.hsd1.ma.comcast.net] has quit [Quit: bhyde] 23:30:02 bhyde [~bhyde@c-24-61-81-138.hsd1.ma.comcast.net] has joined #ccl 23:43:18 -!- mc40 [~mc@host86-148-31-142.range86-148.btcentralplus.com] has quit [Quit: mc40] 23:48:29 -!- rme [~rme@50.43.190.179] has quit [Quit: rme] 23:59:09 -!- bhyde [~bhyde@c-24-61-81-138.hsd1.ma.comcast.net] has quit [Quit: bhyde]