Displaying 7 results from an estimated 7 matches for "pthread_cond_destroy".
Did you mean:
thread_cond_destroy
2002 Jan 18
1
ogg123 1.0rc3 thread issue
...ffer.c.orig Thu Dec 20 01:24:53 2001
+++ ogg123/buffer.c Wed Jan 16 03:26:15 2002
@@ -88,9 +88,11 @@
/* Cleanup thread data structures */
pthread_mutex_unlock(&buf->mutex);
+#if 0 /* KLUDGE: disabling this keeps ogg123 from crashing */
pthread_mutex_destroy(&buf->mutex);
pthread_cond_destroy(&buf->playback_cond);
pthread_cond_destroy(&buf->write_cond);
+#endif
}
<p>
--
Christian "naddy" Weisgerber naddy@mips.inka.de
--- >8 ----
List archives: http://www.xiph.org/archives/
Ogg project homepage: http://www.xiph.org/ogg/
To...
2009 Mar 18
3
[LLVMdev] Status of LLVM's atomic intrinsics
.../* Wait for all threads to complete */
for (i=0; i<NUM_THREADS; i++) {
pthread_join(threads[i], NULL);
}
printf ("Main(): Waited on %d threads. Done.\n", NUM_THREADS);
/* Clean up and exit */
pthread_attr_destroy(&attr);
pthread_mutex_destroy(&count_mutex);
pthread_cond_destroy(&count_threshold_cv);
pthread_exit(NULL);
}
--
Dr Jon Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy Ltd.
http://www.ffconsultancy.com/?e
2020 Aug 06
5
[PATCH nbdkit NOT WORKING 0/2] vddk: Relax threading model.
I believe this roughly implements Nir's proposal here:
https://www.redhat.com/archives/libguestfs/2020-August/msg00028.html
Unfortunately it doesn't work for me. It actually slows things down
quite a lot, for reasons I don't understand. Note the adjustment of
the pool-max parameter and how it affects the total time. The results
are quite reproducible.
$ ./nbdkit -r -U - vddk
2020 Aug 06
0
[PATCH nbdkit 2/2] vddk: Relax thread model to PARALLEL and implement a disk handle pool.
...handle));
+ h->flags |= VIXDISKLIB_FLAG_OPEN_UNBUFFERED;
return h;
- err2:
- DEBUG_CALL ("VixDiskLib_Disconnect", "connection");
- VixDiskLib_Disconnect (h->connection);
err1:
free_connect_params (h->params);
err0:
+ free (h->vddk_handles.ptr);
+ pthread_cond_destroy (&h->vddk_handles_cond);
+ pthread_mutex_destroy (&h->vddk_handles_lock);
free (h);
return NULL;
}
+/* Get a VDDK handle on demand. */
+static VixDiskLibHandle
+open_vddk_handle (struct handle *h)
+{
+ ACQUIRE_LOCK_FOR_CURRENT_SCOPE (&open_close_lock);
+ VixDiskLibHand...
2020 Aug 06
3
Re: [PATCH nbdkit 2/2] vddk: Relax thread model to PARALLEL and implement a disk handle pool.
...UNBUFFERED;
>
> return h;
>
> - err2:
> - DEBUG_CALL ("VixDiskLib_Disconnect", "connection");
> - VixDiskLib_Disconnect (h->connection);
> err1:
> free_connect_params (h->params);
> err0:
> + free (h->vddk_handles.ptr);
> + pthread_cond_destroy (&h->vddk_handles_cond);
> + pthread_mutex_destroy (&h->vddk_handles_lock);
> free (h);
> return NULL;
> }
>
> +/* Get a VDDK handle on demand. */
> +static VixDiskLibHandle
> +open_vddk_handle (struct handle *h)
> +{
> + ACQUIRE_LOCK_FOR_CURRENT...
2009 Mar 18
0
[LLVMdev] Status of LLVM's atomic intrinsics
...for (i=0; i<NUM_THREADS; i++) {
> pthread_join(threads[i], NULL);
> }
> printf ("Main(): Waited on %d threads. Done.\n", NUM_THREADS);
>
> /* Clean up and exit */
> pthread_attr_destroy(&attr);
> pthread_mutex_destroy(&count_mutex);
> pthread_cond_destroy(&count_threshold_cv);
> pthread_exit(NULL);
>
> }
>
2006 Oct 30
2
[LLVMdev] "fork" and "sync" for LLVM thread support - any comments?
Dear all,
Recently I've wanted to add support for threads to LLVM (motivated by
OpenMP, more or less), but before jumping in and implementing anything,
I thought it might be a good idea to describe what I have in mind and
ask for comments. Hence this email - if anyone has any comments, I'd be
very glad to hear them.
WHAT I'M PROPOSING:
The addition of two instructions - fork