[Openmcl-devel] odd ccl hang during gc
Osei Poku
osei.poku at gmail.com
Wed Jul 8 06:04:21 PDT 2009
Ok thanks. I filed ticket #554 (http://trac.clozure.com/ccl/ticket/
554) just to keep track.
On Jul 8, 2009, at 8:52 AM, Gary Byers wrote:
> No, this hasn't been addressed yet; I'll try to do so in the next
> day or two.
>
> I'd misinterpreted what I'd seen earlier; I'd thought that the GC
> thread
> had resumed all of the waiting threads and then tried to call free()
> and
> deadlocked because the waiting threads hadn't woken up; it wouldn't
> have
> been safe to call free() before the suspended threads are awoken,
> because
> one of those threads may hold a lock that free() needs.
>
> Of course, on some platforms, disposing of semaphores (directly or
> indirectly) can cause free() to be called, and the GC calls
> destroy_semaphore(). That's pretty amazingly stupid of it: if a
> suspended
> thread owns a lock that free() wants, we deadlock, and that's what
> you're
> seeing here, in this little chunk of backtrace:
>
>>>> #0 0x00002b9fab9d11d8 in ?? () from /lib/libc.so.6
>>>> #1 0x00002b9fab967662 in ?? () from /lib/libc.so.6
>>>> #2 0x00002b9fab9666f1 in free () from /lib/libc.so.6
>>>> #3 0x000000000041ca69 in destroy_semaphore (s=0x3000436cc0c8)
>>>> at ../thread_manager.c:724
>>>> #4 0x0000000000414caa in reap_gcable_ptrs () at ../gc-common.c:746
>>>> #5 0x00000000004157bd in gc (tcr=0x426097b0, param=<value
>>>> optimized out>)
>
> That's a stupid bug, but it's much, much better than what I
> misinterpreted
> it to be (which was something like "sometimes, when the GC tries to
> awaken
> suspended threads by signalling the semaphores they're waiting on,
> the OS
> decides not to bother.") That'd be harder to do anything about ...
>
>
> On Wed, 8 Jul 2009, Osei Poku wrote:
>
>> On Jul 7, 2009, at 4:31 PM, Gary Byers wrote:
>>
>>> If you still have the image running and the one thread that's not in
>>> sem_timedwait() is actually trying to call free() from inside the
>>> gc()
>>> - as is happening above - then this isn't the subtle, mysterious
>>> thing
>>> that I thought it must be but is instead just a stupid bug. (We
>>> know
>>> that we can't call free() from inside the GC without risking
>>> deadlock,
>>> but calling destroy_semaphore() in that context can cause free()
>>> to be
>>> called.)
>>
>> The relevant backtrace was already attached and indicates the
>> situation you describe.. So this is already address in the current
>> version?
>>
>>>> (gdb) info threads
>>>> 14 Thread 1076246864 (LWP 3695) 0x00002b9fab6e249b in
>>>> sem_timedwait () from /lib/libpthread.so.0
>>>> 13 Thread 1078753616 (LWP 3697) 0x00002b9fab6e249b in
>>>> sem_timedwait () from /lib/libpthread.so.0
>>>> 12 Thread 1081260368 (LWP 3701) 0x00002b9fab6e249b in
>>>> sem_timedwait () from /lib/libpthread.so.0
>>>> 11 Thread 1083767120 (LWP <3702) 0x00002b9fab6e249b in
>>>> sem_timedwait () from /lib/libpthread.so.0
>>>> 10 Thread 1086273872 (LWP 3703) 0x00002b9fab6e249b in
>>>> sem_timedwait () from /lib/libpthread.so.0
>>>> 9 Thread 1088780624 (LWP 3704) 0x00002b9fab6e249b in
>>>> sem_timedwait () from /lib/libpthread.so.0
>>>> 8 Thread 1091287376 (LWP 19572) 0x00002b9fab6e249b in
>>>> sem_timedwait () from /lib/libpthread.so.0
>>>> 7 Thread 1116133712 (LWP 28035) 0x00002b9fab6e249b in
>>>> sem_timedwait () from /lib/libpthread.so.0
>>>> 6 Thread 1111120208 (LWP 28036) 0x00002b9fab6e249b in
>>>> sem_timedwait () from /lib/libpthread.so.0
>>>> 5 Thread 1099680080 (LWP 28037) 0x00002b9fab6e249b in
>>>> sem_timedwait () from /lib/libpthread.so.0
>>>> 4 Thread 1108072784 (LWP 28038) 0x00002b9fab6e249b in
>>>> sem_timedwait () from /lib/libpthread.so.0
>>>> 3 Thread 1113626960 (LWP 28625) 0x00002b9fab9d11d8 in ?? ()
>>>> from /lib/libc.so.6
>>>> 2 Thread 1121147216 (LWP 29139) 0x00002b9fab6e249b in
>>>> sem_timedwait () from /lib/libpthread.so.0
>>>> 1 Thread 47964781596768 (LWP 3691) 0x00002b9fab6e249b in
>>>> sem_timedwait () from /lib/libpthread.so.0
>>>> (gdb) thread 3
>>>> [Switching to thread 3 (Thread 1113626960 (LWP 28625))]#0
>>>> 0x00002b9fab9d11d8 in ?? () from /lib/libc.so.6
>>>> (gdb) bt
>>>> #0 0x00002b9fab9d11d8 in ?? () from /lib/libc.so.6
>>>> #1 0x00002b9fab967662 in ?? () from /lib/libc.so.6
>>>> #2 0x00002b9fab9666f1 in free () from /lib/libc.so.6
>>>> #3 0x000000000041ca69 in destroy_semaphore (s=0x3000436cc0c8)
>>>> at ../thread_manager.c:724
>>>> #4 0x0000000000414caa in reap_gcable_ptrs () at ../gc-common.c:746
>>>> #5 0x00000000004157bd in gc (tcr=0x426097b0, param=<value
>>>> optimized out>) at ../gc-common.c:1331
>>>> #6 0x00000000004196db in gc_from_tcr (tcr=0x2aaab0000020,
>>>> param=0) at ../x86-exceptions.c:2786
>>>> #7 0x000000000041abe1 in gc_like_from_xp (xp=<value optimized
>>>> out>, fun=0x4196b0 <gc_from_tcr>, param=0) at ../x86-exceptions.c:
>>>> 2743
>>>> #8 0x000000000041ac3e in gc_from_xp (xp=0x2aaab0000020,
>>>> param=46912586140688) at ../x86-exceptions.c:2798
>>>> #9 0x000000000041b14f in handle_gc_trap (xp=0x426086f0,
>>>> tcr=0x426097b0) at ../x86-exceptions.c:239
>>>> #10 0x000000000041b5eb in handle_exception (signum=<value
>>>> optimized out>, info=0x42608aa0, context=0x426086f0,
>>>> tcr=0x8000000000000000, old_valence=-1) at ../x86-exceptions.c:1066
>>>> #11 0x000000000041b698 in signal_handler (signum=11,
>>>> info=0x42608aa0, context=0x426086f0) at ../x86-exceptions.c:1330
>>>> #12 <signal handler called>
>>>> #13 0x00003000400135e7 in ?? ()
>>>> #14 0x00003000419096a4 in ?? ()
>>>> #15 0x000000000040ee7c in _SPnthrowvalues () at ../x86-
>>>> spentry64.s:1405
>>>> #16 0x00002aaaae17eae0 in ?? ()
>>>> #17 0x0000000000000008 in ?? ()
>>>> #18 0x0000000000000000 in ?? ()
>>>> On Apr 15, 2009, at 2:50 AM, Gary Byers wrote:
>>>>> and the sem_wait_forever() is coming from
>>>>> suspend_resume_handler(), which
>>>>> means that those threads (and likely all others) are waiting on
>>>>> semaphores
>>>>> that should have been signaled a while ago.
>>>>> Just as a stab in the dark: what kind of hardware is this ?
>>>>> (e.g., what
>>>>> does
>>>>> $ cat /proc/cpuinfo
>>>>> say ?)
>>>>> On Wed, 15 Apr 2009, Osei Poku wrote:
>>>>>> Unfortunately, I killed the process. Fortunately, I did run
>>>>>> the following backtraces on other a few other threads than #3.
>>>>>> According to the line numbers shown in the output below, it
>>>>>> appears that they (at least the 3 threads I looked at) are all
>>>>>> stopped at SEM_WAIT_FOREVER().
>>>>>> I guess the mystery continues...
>>>>>> Osei
>>>>>> (gdb) info threads
>>>>>> 15 Thread 1076246864 (LWP 14275) 0x00002b9bfc77149b in
>>>>>> sem_timedwait () from /lib/libpthread.so.0
>>>>>> 14 Thread 1078753616 (LWP 14278) 0x00002b9bfc77149b in
>>>>>> sem_timedwait () from /lib/libpthread.so.0
>>>>>> 13 Thread 1081260368 (LWP 14280) 0x00002b9bfc77149b in
>>>>>> sem_timedwait () from /lib/libpthread.so.0
>>>>>> 12 Thread 1083767120 (LWP 14281) 0x00002b9bfc77149b in
>>>>>> sem_timedwait () from /lib/libpthread.so.0
>>>>>> 11 Thread 1086273872 (LWP 14282) 0x00002b9bfc77149b in
>>>>>> sem_timedwait () from /lib/libpthread.so.0
>>>>>> 10 Thread 1088780624 (LWP 14283) 0x00002b9bfc77149b in
>>>>>> sem_timedwait () from /lib/libpthread.so.0
>>>>>> 9 Thread 1091287376 (LWP 24522) 0x00002b9bfc77149b in
>>>>>> sem_timedwait () from /lib/libpthread.so.0
>>>>>> 8 Thread 1093794128 (LWP 24523) 0x00002b9bfc77149b in
>>>>>> sem_timedwait () from /lib/libpthread.so.0
>>>>>> 7 Thread 1096841552 (LWP 24524) 0x00002b9bfc77149b in
>>>>>> sem_timedwait () from /lib/libpthread.so.0
>>>>>> 6 Thread 1099348304 (LWP 24525) 0x00002b9bfc77149b in
>>>>>> sem_timedwait () from /lib/libpthread.so.0
>>>>>> 5 Thread 1101855056 (LWP 28424) 0x00002b9bfc77149b in
>>>>>> sem_timedwait () from /lib/libpthread.so.0
>>>>>> 4 Thread 1104361808 (LWP 28425) 0x00002b9bfc77149b in
>>>>>> sem_timedwait () from /lib/libpthread.so.0
>>>>>> * 3 Thread 1106868560 (LWP 28426) 0x00002b9bfca601d8 in ?? ()
>>>>>> from /lib/libc.so.6
>>>>>> 2 Thread 1109375312 (LWP 28427) 0x00002b9bfc77149b in
>>>>>> sem_timedwait () from /lib/libpthread.so.0
>>>>>> 1 Thread 47948961267808 (LWP 14271) 0x00002b9bfc77149b in
>>>>>> sem_timedwait () from /lib/libpthread.so.0
>>>>>> (gdb) thread 4
>>>>>> [Switching to thread 4 (Thread 1104361808 (LWP 28425))]#0
>>>>>> 0x00002b9bfc77149b in sem_timedwait () from /lib/libpthread.so.0
>>>>>> (gdb) bt
>>>>>> #0 0x00002b9bfc77149b in sem_timedwait () from /lib/
>>>>>> libpthread.so.0
>>>>>> #1 0x000000000041cc3c in sem_wait_forever (s=0x1ce0cb0) at ../
>>>>>> thread_manager.c:443
>>>>>> #2 0x000000000041da7f in suspend_resume_handler (signo=<value
>>>>>> optimized out>, info=<value optimized out>, context=0x41d32670)
>>>>>> at ../thread_manager.c:594
>>>>>> #3 <signal handler called>
>>>>>> #4 0x00002b9bfc77149b in sem_timedwait () from /lib/
>>>>>> libpthread.so.0
>>>>>> #5 0x000000000041cbdb in wait_on_semaphore (s=0x18078b0,
>>>>>> seconds=1, millis=0) at ../thread_manager.c:468
>>>>>> #6 0x0000000000411402 in _SPffcall () at ../x86-spentry64.s:4041
>>>>>> #7 0x0000000000000000 in ?? ()
>>>>>> (gdb) thread 5
>>>>>> [Switching to thread 5 (Thread 1101855056 (LWP 28424))]#0
>>>>>> 0x00002b9bfc77149b in sem_timedwait () from /lib/libpthread.so.0
>>>>>> (gdb) bt
>>>>>> #0 0x00002b9bfc77149b in sem_timedwait () from /lib/
>>>>>> libpthread.so.0
>>>>>> #1 0x000000000041cc3c in sem_wait_forever (s=0xd3e4b0) at ../
>>>>>> thread_manager.c:443
>>>>>> #2 0x000000000041da7f in suspend_resume_handler (signo=<value
>>>>>> optimized out>, info=<value optimized out>, context=0x41ace650)
>>>>>> at ../thread_manager.c:594
>>>>>> #3 <signal handler called>
>>>>>> #4 0x00002b9bfc7727b1 in ?? () from /lib/libpthread.so.0
>>>>>> #5 0x0000000000411402 in _SPffcall () at ../x86-spentry64.s:4041
>>>>>> #6 0x0000000041aced60 in ?? ()
>>>>>> #7 0x00002aaaaf859e88 in ?? ()
>>>>>> #8 0x000000000000031a in ?? ()
>>>>>> #9 0x0000000041aced50 in ?? ()
>>>>>> #10 0x0000000000000000 in ?? ()
>>>>>> (gdb) thread 6
>>>>>> [Switching to thread 6 (Thread 1099348304 (LWP 24525))]#0
>>>>>> 0x00002b9bfc77149b in sem_timedwait () from /lib/libpthread.so.0
>>>>>> (gdb) bt
>>>>>> #0 0x00002b9bfc77149b in sem_timedwait () from /lib/
>>>>>> libpthread.so.0
>>>>>> #1 0x000000000041cc3c in sem_wait_forever (s=0x23af950) at ../
>>>>>> thread_manager.c:443
>>>>>> #2 0x000000000041da7f in suspend_resume_handler (signo=<value
>>>>>> optimized out>, info=<value optimized out>, context=0x4186a6c0)
>>>>>> at ../thread_manager.c:594
>>>>>> #3 <signal handler called>
>>>>>> #4 0x00002b9bfc771efb in ?? () from /lib/libpthread.so.0
>>>>>> #5 0x0000000000411402 in _SPffcall () at ../x86-spentry64.s:4041
>>>>>> #6 0x0000000000000000 in ?? ()
>>>>>> On Apr 15, 2009, at 1:34 AM, Gary Byers wrote:
>>>>>>> A bunch of threads (all but the one that GDB identifies as #3)
>>>>>>> were
>>>>>>> suspended by thread 3 when it ran the GC; each such suspended
>>>>>>> thread
>>>>>>> is waiting on a semaphore that'd be signaled/raised when the
>>>>>>> GC exits.
>>>>>>> It looks like the GC exited and is in the process of trying to
>>>>>>> free
>>>>>>> some foreign objects that were referenced by "gcable
>>>>>>> pointers"; it
>>>>>>> has to signal the other threads' semaphores (to wake them up)
>>>>>>> before
>>>>>>> it actually frees anything, since one of those threads may own
>>>>>>> a lock
>>>>>>> on the malloc heap.
>>>>>>> It looks like the GC thread (#3) called free(), and is waiting
>>>>>>> for
>>>>>>> a lock that's likely held by one of the other threads that's
>>>>>>> likely
>>>>>>> to still be waiting (in sem_timedwait()) to be told that it's OK
>>>>>>> to run. The GC thread's already signaled the semaphores that
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>> other threads are waiting on, but they don't seem to have gotten
>>>>>>> the message.
>>>>>>> It's not that unusual to see that some of the other threads
>>>>>>> are apparently
>>>>>>> still waiting for their "resume" semaphores; it's a little
>>>>>>> unusual to
>>>>>>> see that they're all waiting, and I'd guess that they have
>>>>>>> been waiting
>>>>>>> since you noticed the load average dropping to 0.
>>>>>>> If you still have the GDB attached, you might try something:
>>>>>>> make each
>>>>>>> other thread (other than #3) active in GDB and use 'up' to see
>>>>>>> how it
>>>>>>> got to sem_timedwait(). My guess is that you'd see the call to
>>>>>>> SEM_WAIT_FOREVER in the function 'suspend_resume_handler()' (in
>>>>>>> ccl/lisp-kernel/thread-manager.c) a few frames up the stack in
>>>>>>> each
>>>>>>> cases. If you see that any of these threads is waiting for
>>>>>>> anything
>>>>>>> other than its tcr->resume semaphore, that'd be interesting.
>>>>>>> Otherwise, this is a bit of a mystery, since the whole
>>>>>>> 'suspend other
>>>>>>> threads on GC entry, signal their resume semaphores on GC
>>>>>>> exit' routine
>>>>>>> happens on every GC, and has likely happened hundreds or
>>>>>>> thousands of
>>>>>>> times already in this session, and it's not clear what's
>>>>>>> different this
>>>>>>> time.
>>>>>>> On Wed, 15 Apr 2009, Osei Poku wrote:
>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>> I was running three slime repls (9 threads total) and in each
>>>>>>>> repl I
>>>>>>>> was running the same long running function on different
>>>>>>>> inputs. After
>>>>>>>> a few hours of my load being about 2.8, it dropped down to 0.0.
>>>>>>>> Basically nothing was running, nothing responding etc. All
>>>>>>>> threads
>>>>>>>> are frozen. As is confirmed by the backtrace in the main
>>>>>>>> thread (see
>>>>>>>> below), this happened during gc which makes sense since all
>>>>>>>> activity
>>>>>>>> stops during gc. Not sure what else I can do to revive the
>>>>>>>> process
>>>>>>>> but I thought it might be useful to report the issue.
>>>>>>>> This is from CCL version 1.3-RC1-r11885M.
>>>>>>>> Osei
>>>>>>>> --- gdb output -----
>>>>>>>> (gdb) info threads
>>>>>>>> 15 Thread 1076246864 (LWP 14275) 0x00002b9bfc77149b in
>>>>>>>> sem_timedwait () from /lib/libpthread.so.0
>>>>>>>> 14 Thread 1078753616 (LWP 14278) 0x00002b9bfc77149b in
>>>>>>>> sem_timedwait () from /lib/libpthread.so.0
>>>>>>>> 13 Thread 1081260368 (LWP 14280) 0x00002b9bfc77149b in
>>>>>>>> sem_timedwait () from /lib/libpthread.so.0
>>>>>>>> 12 Thread 1083767120 (LWP 14281) 0x00002b9bfc77149b in
>>>>>>>> sem_timedwait () from /lib/libpthread.so.0
>>>>>>>> 11 Thread 1086273872 (LWP 14282) 0x00002b9bfc77149b in
>>>>>>>> sem_timedwait () from /lib/libpthread.so.0
>>>>>>>> 10 Thread 1088780624 (LWP 14283) 0x00002b9bfc77149b in
>>>>>>>> sem_timedwait () from /lib/libpthread.so.0
>>>>>>>> 9 Thread 1091287376 (LWP 24522) 0x00002b9bfc77149b in
>>>>>>>> sem_timedwait () from /lib/libpthread.so.0
>>>>>>>> 8 Thread 1093794128 (LWP 24523) 0x00002b9bfc77149b in
>>>>>>>> sem_timedwait () from /lib/libpthread.so.0
>>>>>>>> 7 Thread 1096841552 (LWP 24524) 0x00002b9bfc77149b in
>>>>>>>> sem_timedwait () from /lib/libpthread.so.0
>>>>>>>> 6 Thread 1099348304 (LWP 24525) 0x00002b9bfc77149b in
>>>>>>>> sem_timedwait () from /lib/libpthread.so.0
>>>>>>>> 5 Thread 1101855056 (LWP 28424) 0x00002b9bfc77149b in
>>>>>>>> sem_timedwait () from /lib/libpthread.so.0
>>>>>>>> 4 Thread 1104361808 (LWP 28425) 0x00002b9bfc77149b in
>>>>>>>> sem_timedwait () from /lib/libpthread.so.0
>>>>>>>> 3 Thread 1106868560 (LWP 28426) 0x00002b9bfca601d8 in ?? ()
>>>>>>>> from /
>>>>>>>> lib/libc.so.6
>>>>>>>> 2 Thread 1109375312 (LWP 28427) 0x00002b9bfc77149b in
>>>>>>>> sem_timedwait () from /lib/libpthread.so.0
>>>>>>>> 1 Thread 47948961267808 (LWP 14271) 0x00002b9bfc77149b in
>>>>>>>> sem_timedwait () from /lib/libpthread.so.0
>>>>>>>> (gdb) thread
>>>>>>>> [Current thread is 0 (LWP 14271)]
>>>>>>>> (gdb) thread 2
>>>>>>>> [Switching to thread 2 (Thread 1109375312 (LWP 28427))]#0
>>>>>>>> 0x00002b9bfc77149b in sem_timedwait () from /lib/
>>>>>>>> libpthread.so.0
>>>>>>>> (gdb) thread 3
>>>>>>>> [Switching to thread 3 (Thread 1106868560 (LWP 28426))]#0
>>>>>>>> 0x00002b9bfca601d8 in ?? () from /lib/libc.so.6
>>>>>>>> (gdb) bt
>>>>>>>> #0 0x00002b9bfca601d8 in ?? () from /lib/libc.so.6
>>>>>>>> #1 0x00002b9bfc9f6662 in ?? () from /lib/libc.so.6
>>>>>>>> #2 0x00002b9bfc9f56f1 in free () from /lib/libc.so.6
>>>>>>>> #3 0x000000000041ca69 in destroy_semaphore
>>>>>>>> (s=0x300055b0bc08) at ../
>>>>>>>> thread_manager.c:724
>>>>>>>> #4 0x0000000000414caa in reap_gcable_ptrs () at ../gc-
>>>>>>>> common.c:746
>>>>>>>> #5 0x00000000004157bd in gc (tcr=0x41f977b0, param=<value
>>>>>>>> optimized
>>>>>>>> out>) at ../gc-common.c:1331
>>>>>>>> #6 0x00000000004196db in gc_from_tcr (tcr=0x2b9bfccd6980,
>>>>>>>> param=0)
>>>>>>>> at ../x86-exceptions.c:2786
>>>>>>>> #7 0x000000000041abe1 in gc_like_from_xp (xp=<value
>>>>>>>> optimized out>,
>>>>>>>> fun=0x4196b0 <gc_from_tcr>, param=0) at ../x86-exceptions.c:
>>>>>>>> 2743
>>>>>>>> #8 0x000000000041ac3e in gc_from_xp (xp=0x2b9bfccd6980,
>>>>>>>> param=25576416) at ../x86-exceptions.c:2798
>>>>>>>> #9 0x000000000041ad67 in allocate_object (xp=0x41f966f0,
>>>>>>>> bytes_needed=6352096, disp_from_allocptr=6352083,
>>>>>>>> tcr=0x41f977b0)
>>>>>>>> at ../x86-exceptions.c:145
>>>>>>>> #10 0x000000000041adce in handle_alloc_trap (xp=0x41f966f0,
>>>>>>>> tcr=0x41f977b0) at ../x86-exceptions.c:572
>>>>>>>> #11 0x000000000041b5ce in handle_exception (signum=<value
>>>>>>>> optimized
>>>>>>>> out>, info=0x41f96aa0, context=0x41f966f0,
>>>>>>>> tcr=0x8000000000000000,
>>>>>>>> old_valence=-1) at ../x86-exceptions.c:1060
>>>>>>>> #12 0x000000000041b698 in signal_handler (signum=11,
>>>>>>>> info=0x41f96aa0,
>>>>>>>> context=0x41f966f0) at ../x86-exceptions.c:1330
>>>>>>>> #13 <signal handler called>
>>>>>>>> #14 0x000000000041054a in _SPmisc_alloc () at ../x86-
>>>>>>>> spentry64.s:2840
>>>>>>>> #15 0x000030004036943c in ?? ()
>>>>>>>> #16 0x000000000060ecd0 in ?? ()
>>>>>>>> #17 0x0000000000000000 in ?? ()
>>>>>>>> (gdb) up
>>>>>>>> #1 0x00002b9bfc9f6662 in ?? () from /lib/libc.so.6
>>>>>>>> (gdb) up
>>>>>>>> #2 0x00002b9bfc9f56f1 in free () from /lib/libc.so.6
>>>>>>>> (gdb) up
>>>>>>>> #3 0x000000000041ca69 in destroy_semaphore
>>>>>>>> (s=0x300055b0bc08) at ../
>>>>>>>> thread_manager.c:724
>>>>>>>> 724 free(*s);
>>>>>>>> (gdb) list
>>>>>>>> 719 destroy_semaphore(void **s)
>>>>>>>> 720 {
>>>>>>>> 721 if (*s) {
>>>>>>>> 722 #ifdef USE_POSIX_SEMAPHORES
>>>>>>>> 723 sem_destroy((sem_t *)*s);
>>>>>>>> 724 free(*s);
>>>>>>>> 725 #endif
>>>>>>>> 726 #ifdef USE_MACH_SEMAPHORES
>>>>>>>> 727 semaphore_destroy(mach_task_self(),((semaphore_t)
>>>>>>>> (natural)
>>>>>>>> *s));
>>>>>>>> 728 #endif
>>>>>>>> (gdb) up
>>>>>>>> #4 0x0000000000414caa in reap_gcable_ptrs () at ../gc-
>>>>>>>> common.c:746
>>>>>>>> 746 destroy_semaphore((void**)&(x->address));
>>>>>>>> (gdb) list
>>>>>>>> 741 case xmacptr_flag_rwlock:
>>>>>>>> 742 rwlock_destroy((rwlock
>>>>>>>> *)ptr_from_lispobj(ptr));
>>>>>>>> 743 break;
>>>>>>>> 744
>>>>>>>> 745 case xmacptr_flag_semaphore:
>>>>>>>> 746 destroy_semaphore((void**)&(x->address));
>>>>>>>> 747 break;
>>>>>>>> 748
>>>>>>>> 749 default:
>>>>>>>> 750 if ((flag >= xmacptr_flag_user_first) &&
>>>>>>>> (gdb)
>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> Openmcl-devel mailing list
>>>>>>>> Openmcl-devel at clozure.com
>>>>>>>> http://clozure.com/mailman/listinfo/openmcl-devel
>>
More information about the Openmcl-devel
mailing list