Re: [boost] [atomic, x86] need another pair of eyes

Subject: Re: [boost] [atomic, x86] need another pair of eyes
From: Tim Blechmann (tim_at_[hidden])
Date: 2012-12-22 10:02:59

hi peter & others,

>>>>> Which tests fail, by the way?
>>>>> > >> >
>>>>> > >> > the stress test for the spsp_queue (spsc_queue_test_caching) ... one
>>>>> > >> > thread enqueueing a large number of elements, one thread dequeueing 
>>>>> > >> > ...
>>> > > Yes but how? Which BOOST_REQUIRE fails, and what does it say?
>> >
>> > some elements are lost ... the receiver reads less elements than the
>> > sender enqueues:
>> > BOOST_REQUIRE_EQUAL(received_nodes, nodes_per_thread);
> I think that this is a possible and legitimate outcome of your test. Nothing 
> guarantees that the receiver will see the last batch of elements before 
> seeing running = false. You have to set running = false from the writer 
> thread for that to be guaranteed. 

unfortunately this test still failed on one of the sandia machines
(gcc-4.7.1_0x) ...

iac, i wonder: would anyone be able to give me ssh access to a multi-cpu
(not multi-core) machine to do some experiments?

thnx, tim