Re: [boost] [Interprocess::Semaphore] Deadlock on more producers - one consumer problem

Subject: Re: [boost] [Interprocess::Semaphore] Deadlock on more producers - one consumer problem
From: Ion Gaztañaga (igaztanaga_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-06-20 17:54:40

Zachary Turner wrote:

> Sorry for jumping into the middle of this.  But shouldn't it only
> notify_one() if count is greater than or equal to 0?  Not
> unconditionally.  It's possible to initialize the semaphore with a
> negative count, and in that case a call to wait() should not unblock
> until the semaphore is 0 or higher.

Ummm... Interprocess models POSIX primitives and I see that

#include <semaphore.h>

int sem_init(sem_t *sem, int pshared, unsigned int value);

semaphore value should be always positive, something that does not 
happen in Interprocess:

interprocess_semaphore(int initialCount);

So I think I should change interprocess constructor to an unsigned int.

Best,

Ion