[Boost-users] [interprocess] Is there a bug in spinlock atomic implementations 1.39 and 1.40?

Subject: [Boost-users] [interprocess] Is there a bug in spinlock atomic implementations 1.39 and 1.40?
From: Sakharuk, Vladimir (vladimir.sakharuk_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-10-13 14:37:41

Hi all 
> In both:
> 
> boost/detail/spinlock_sync.hpp
> boost/detail/smart_ptr/spinlock_sync.hpp
> 
> 
> Spinlock does not has constructor, so it is possible to have
> spinlock::v_ uninitialized and not to equal zero.
> That means it may be locked by default and call below will always
> return false...
> bool try_lock()
>     {
>         int r = __sync_lock_test_and_set( &v_, 1 );
>         return r == 0;
>     }
> Am I missing something?
> 
> Adding
> Spinlock(): v_(0) {}
> Looks like solves my issue.
> g++ 4.1.2 on suse 2.6.16.46
> 
> Regards Vlad.
> 

=============================================================================== 
 Please access the attached hyperlink for an important electronic communications disclaimer: 
 http://www.credit-suisse.com/legal/en/disclaimer_email_ib.html 
 ===============================================================================