Steven, Thanks! If I can not use detail folder is there other ways I can use atomic based spinlock? Please follow the attached hyperlink to an important disclosure: http://www.credit-suisse.com/legal/marketcommentary -----Original Message----- From: boost-users-bounces@lists.boost.org [mailto:boost-users-bounces@lists.boost.org] On Behalf Of Steven Watanabe Sent: Tuesday, October 13, 2009 10:22 PM To: boost-users@lists.boost.org Subject: Re: [Boost-users] [interprocess] Is there a bug in spinlock atomic implementations 1.39 and 1.40? AMDG Sakharuk, Vladimir wrote:
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
This behavior is intentional. boost::detail::spinlock is a POD type. Also, in general you shouldn't use anything in a detail directory. In Christ, Steven Watanabe _______________________________________________ Boost-users mailing list Boost-users@lists.boost.org http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost-users =============================================================================== Please access the attached hyperlink for an important electronic communications disclaimer: http://www.credit-suisse.com/legal/en/disclaimer_email_ib.html ===============================================================================