From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 15953 invoked by alias); 12 Feb 2014 17:25:51 -0000 Mailing-List: contact glibc-bugs-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: glibc-bugs-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 15913 invoked by uid 48); 12 Feb 2014 17:25:48 -0000 From: "vinxxe at gmail dot com" To: glibc-bugs@sourceware.org Subject: [Bug nptl/16549] pthread_cond_wait and pthread_cond_timedwait do not suspend the calling thread Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2014 17:25:00 -0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: glibc X-Bugzilla-Component: nptl X-Bugzilla-Version: 2.12 X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: vinxxe at gmail dot com X-Bugzilla-Status: RESOLVED X-Bugzilla-Priority: P2 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at sourceware dot org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: --- X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Bugzilla-URL: http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-SW-Source: 2014-02/txt/msg00428.txt.bz2 https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16549 --- Comment #20 from vinxxe at gmail dot com --- I already agreed with your point. As a matter of fact I removed the bug and submitted the question to the gcc guys. (In reply to Rich Felker from comment #18) > On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 10:09:40AM +0000, vinxxe at gmail dot com wrote: > > seriously, give me a suggestion. I'm only asking for help, no joke! > > I've searched the web but I didn't find any clear statement about misaligned > > variables always leading to unpredictable result. I've only found about > > performance issues. why can't you just give me some reference instead of > > fooling me? > > The C standard simply does not allow misaligned objects to even come > into existence. The only way you can get them is by performing illegal > pointer arithmetic/casts/aliasing violations or by using nasty > nonstandard compiler-specific features like __attribute__ or #pragma > pack. The latter (these compilers) is where the documentation belongs > that you cannot take the address of a misaligned object and pass it to > a function expecting a pointer to that type. At present I don't think > they are documenting this correctly. This is why I suggested filing a > bug report against GCC to tag the type so that attempting to pass it > is a compile-time error. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.