[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2013 14:55:34 +0100
From: magnum <john.magnum@...hmail.com>
To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: SIGALRM and new 'done' method
I could reproduce the initial SIGALRM problem we had before 3040fc9 by forcing OS_TIMER=0 in arch.h but I can't reproduce this one. And I really can't see how 4a7c6df could fail to resolve the issue.
Does this only ever happen when testing several (ie. all) formats? If so, that is likely a clue.
magnum
On 12 Jan, 2013, at 1:46 , Claudio André <claudioandre.br@...il.com> wrote:
> I had problems using both. Even the third option below fails (seems it can works sometimes, but not always).
>
>
> - common-opencl.c
> void opencl_process_event(void)
> {
> static int bench_cludge = 0;
>
> /* bench_running may be reset while we still have the benchmark
> timer active, leading to SIGALRM. Only seen with !OS_TIMER. */
> bench_cludge |= bench_running;
>
> if (!bench_cludge) {
> #if !OS_TIMER
> sig_timer_emu_tick();
> #endif
> if (event_pending) {
> ...
>
> - bench.c
> static void bench_handle_timer(int signum)
> {
> bench_running = 0;
> #ifndef SA_RESTART
> signal(SIGALRM, bench_handle_timer);
> #endif
> }
>
> Em 11-01-2013 22:16, magnum escreveu:
>> On 12 Jan, 2013, at 0:57 , Claudio André<claudioandre.br@...il.com> wrote:
>>> Em 11-01-2013 21:38, magnum escreveu:
>>>> Try reverting your hack and apply f8bf37d instead. Still a hack, but a better one (I hope).
>>>>
>>>> magnum
>>> Seems to be ok.
>> Please try this one too. If it works, I think it as a better fix.
>>
>> magnum
>>
>
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
