Mac OS X: add semaphore implementation
On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 11:57:04PM +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> On Wed, 16.09.09 15:15, Daniel Mack (daniel@caiaq.de) wrote:
>
> > + s = pa_xnew(pa_semaphore, 1);
> > + MPCreateSemaphore(UINT_MAX, value, &(s->sema));
> > + pa_assert(s->sema != 0);
>
> Hmm, I'd prefer if the ret val of MPCreateSemaphore() would be checked
> here.
>
> Also I find it a bit weird checking for s->sema, though not
> initializing it to 0 in the beginning. If the call actually failed,
> then the assert will check uninitialized memory. Also, comparing
> pointers with 0 sucks. That should be NULL.
>
> Given that this can not realisitically fail, only in OOM or OOM-like
> situations in which case we abort anyway it mght be enough just writing:
>
> pa_assert_se(MPCreateSemaphore(UINT_MAX, value, &s->sema) == 0);
>
> (Assuming that success is signalled by retval == 0 on MacOSX)
>
> > +void pa_semaphore_free(pa_semaphore *s) {
> > + pa_assert(s);
> > + MPDeleteSemaphore(s->sema);
>
> Same here.
>
> > + pa_xfree(s);
> > +}
> > +
> > +void pa_semaphore_post(pa_semaphore *s) {
> > + pa_assert(s);
> > + MPSignalSemaphore(s->sema);
>
> And here.
>
> > +}
> > +
> > +void pa_semaphore_wait(pa_semaphore *s) {
> > + pa_assert(s);
> > + /* should probably check return value (-ve is error), noErr is ok. */
> > + MPWaitOnSemaphore(s->sema, kDurationForever);
>
> And here.
Ok, done. See the patch below.
Daniel
>From 26df2fbae6d9215a3ae084876fb5f79e4d9cf4f0 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Kim Lester <kim@dfusion.com.au>
Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2009 09:23:39 +0800
Subject: [PATCH] Mac OS X: add semaphore implementation
2009-10-19 12:48:00 +02:00
|
|
|
/***
|
|
|
|
|
This file is part of PulseAudio.
|
|
|
|
|
|
2013-04-02 13:10:39 +02:00
|
|
|
Copyright 2006 Lennart Poettering
|
|
|
|
|
Copyright 2013 Albert Zeyer
|
Mac OS X: add semaphore implementation
On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 11:57:04PM +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> On Wed, 16.09.09 15:15, Daniel Mack (daniel@caiaq.de) wrote:
>
> > + s = pa_xnew(pa_semaphore, 1);
> > + MPCreateSemaphore(UINT_MAX, value, &(s->sema));
> > + pa_assert(s->sema != 0);
>
> Hmm, I'd prefer if the ret val of MPCreateSemaphore() would be checked
> here.
>
> Also I find it a bit weird checking for s->sema, though not
> initializing it to 0 in the beginning. If the call actually failed,
> then the assert will check uninitialized memory. Also, comparing
> pointers with 0 sucks. That should be NULL.
>
> Given that this can not realisitically fail, only in OOM or OOM-like
> situations in which case we abort anyway it mght be enough just writing:
>
> pa_assert_se(MPCreateSemaphore(UINT_MAX, value, &s->sema) == 0);
>
> (Assuming that success is signalled by retval == 0 on MacOSX)
>
> > +void pa_semaphore_free(pa_semaphore *s) {
> > + pa_assert(s);
> > + MPDeleteSemaphore(s->sema);
>
> Same here.
>
> > + pa_xfree(s);
> > +}
> > +
> > +void pa_semaphore_post(pa_semaphore *s) {
> > + pa_assert(s);
> > + MPSignalSemaphore(s->sema);
>
> And here.
>
> > +}
> > +
> > +void pa_semaphore_wait(pa_semaphore *s) {
> > + pa_assert(s);
> > + /* should probably check return value (-ve is error), noErr is ok. */
> > + MPWaitOnSemaphore(s->sema, kDurationForever);
>
> And here.
Ok, done. See the patch below.
Daniel
>From 26df2fbae6d9215a3ae084876fb5f79e4d9cf4f0 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Kim Lester <kim@dfusion.com.au>
Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2009 09:23:39 +0800
Subject: [PATCH] Mac OS X: add semaphore implementation
2009-10-19 12:48:00 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
PulseAudio is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify
|
|
|
|
|
it under the terms of the GNU Lesser General Public License as published
|
|
|
|
|
by the Free Software Foundation; either version 2.1 of the License,
|
|
|
|
|
or (at your option) any later version.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
PulseAudio is distributed in the hope that it will be useful, but
|
|
|
|
|
WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
|
|
|
|
|
MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the GNU
|
|
|
|
|
General Public License for more details.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You should have received a copy of the GNU Lesser General Public License
|
|
|
|
|
along with PulseAudio; if not, write to the Free Software
|
|
|
|
|
Foundation, Inc., 59 Temple Place, Suite 330, Boston, MA 02111-1307
|
|
|
|
|
USA.
|
|
|
|
|
***/
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#ifdef HAVE_CONFIG_H
|
|
|
|
|
#include <config.h>
|
|
|
|
|
#endif
|
|
|
|
|
|
2013-04-02 13:10:39 +02:00
|
|
|
#include <stdio.h>
|
|
|
|
|
#include <errno.h>
|
|
|
|
|
#include <pthread.h>
|
|
|
|
|
#include <semaphore.h>
|
|
|
|
|
#include <sys/types.h>
|
|
|
|
|
#include <unistd.h>
|
Mac OS X: add semaphore implementation
On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 11:57:04PM +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> On Wed, 16.09.09 15:15, Daniel Mack (daniel@caiaq.de) wrote:
>
> > + s = pa_xnew(pa_semaphore, 1);
> > + MPCreateSemaphore(UINT_MAX, value, &(s->sema));
> > + pa_assert(s->sema != 0);
>
> Hmm, I'd prefer if the ret val of MPCreateSemaphore() would be checked
> here.
>
> Also I find it a bit weird checking for s->sema, though not
> initializing it to 0 in the beginning. If the call actually failed,
> then the assert will check uninitialized memory. Also, comparing
> pointers with 0 sucks. That should be NULL.
>
> Given that this can not realisitically fail, only in OOM or OOM-like
> situations in which case we abort anyway it mght be enough just writing:
>
> pa_assert_se(MPCreateSemaphore(UINT_MAX, value, &s->sema) == 0);
>
> (Assuming that success is signalled by retval == 0 on MacOSX)
>
> > +void pa_semaphore_free(pa_semaphore *s) {
> > + pa_assert(s);
> > + MPDeleteSemaphore(s->sema);
>
> Same here.
>
> > + pa_xfree(s);
> > +}
> > +
> > +void pa_semaphore_post(pa_semaphore *s) {
> > + pa_assert(s);
> > + MPSignalSemaphore(s->sema);
>
> And here.
>
> > +}
> > +
> > +void pa_semaphore_wait(pa_semaphore *s) {
> > + pa_assert(s);
> > + /* should probably check return value (-ve is error), noErr is ok. */
> > + MPWaitOnSemaphore(s->sema, kDurationForever);
>
> And here.
Ok, done. See the patch below.
Daniel
>From 26df2fbae6d9215a3ae084876fb5f79e4d9cf4f0 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Kim Lester <kim@dfusion.com.au>
Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2009 09:23:39 +0800
Subject: [PATCH] Mac OS X: add semaphore implementation
2009-10-19 12:48:00 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#include <pulse/xmalloc.h>
|
|
|
|
|
#include <pulsecore/macro.h>
|
2013-04-02 13:10:39 +02:00
|
|
|
#include <pulsecore/atomic.h>
|
|
|
|
|
#include <pulsecore/core-util.h>
|
Mac OS X: add semaphore implementation
On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 11:57:04PM +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> On Wed, 16.09.09 15:15, Daniel Mack (daniel@caiaq.de) wrote:
>
> > + s = pa_xnew(pa_semaphore, 1);
> > + MPCreateSemaphore(UINT_MAX, value, &(s->sema));
> > + pa_assert(s->sema != 0);
>
> Hmm, I'd prefer if the ret val of MPCreateSemaphore() would be checked
> here.
>
> Also I find it a bit weird checking for s->sema, though not
> initializing it to 0 in the beginning. If the call actually failed,
> then the assert will check uninitialized memory. Also, comparing
> pointers with 0 sucks. That should be NULL.
>
> Given that this can not realisitically fail, only in OOM or OOM-like
> situations in which case we abort anyway it mght be enough just writing:
>
> pa_assert_se(MPCreateSemaphore(UINT_MAX, value, &s->sema) == 0);
>
> (Assuming that success is signalled by retval == 0 on MacOSX)
>
> > +void pa_semaphore_free(pa_semaphore *s) {
> > + pa_assert(s);
> > + MPDeleteSemaphore(s->sema);
>
> Same here.
>
> > + pa_xfree(s);
> > +}
> > +
> > +void pa_semaphore_post(pa_semaphore *s) {
> > + pa_assert(s);
> > + MPSignalSemaphore(s->sema);
>
> And here.
>
> > +}
> > +
> > +void pa_semaphore_wait(pa_semaphore *s) {
> > + pa_assert(s);
> > + /* should probably check return value (-ve is error), noErr is ok. */
> > + MPWaitOnSemaphore(s->sema, kDurationForever);
>
> And here.
Ok, done. See the patch below.
Daniel
>From 26df2fbae6d9215a3ae084876fb5f79e4d9cf4f0 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Kim Lester <kim@dfusion.com.au>
Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2009 09:23:39 +0800
Subject: [PATCH] Mac OS X: add semaphore implementation
2009-10-19 12:48:00 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#include "semaphore.h"
|
|
|
|
|
|
2013-04-02 13:10:39 +02:00
|
|
|
/* OSX doesn't support unnamed semaphores (via sem_init).
|
|
|
|
|
* Thus, we use a counter to give them enumerated names. */
|
|
|
|
|
static pa_atomic_t id_counter = PA_ATOMIC_INIT(0);
|
|
|
|
|
|
2011-03-02 12:41:26 +01:00
|
|
|
struct pa_semaphore {
|
2013-04-02 13:10:39 +02:00
|
|
|
sem_t *sem;
|
|
|
|
|
int id;
|
Mac OS X: add semaphore implementation
On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 11:57:04PM +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> On Wed, 16.09.09 15:15, Daniel Mack (daniel@caiaq.de) wrote:
>
> > + s = pa_xnew(pa_semaphore, 1);
> > + MPCreateSemaphore(UINT_MAX, value, &(s->sema));
> > + pa_assert(s->sema != 0);
>
> Hmm, I'd prefer if the ret val of MPCreateSemaphore() would be checked
> here.
>
> Also I find it a bit weird checking for s->sema, though not
> initializing it to 0 in the beginning. If the call actually failed,
> then the assert will check uninitialized memory. Also, comparing
> pointers with 0 sucks. That should be NULL.
>
> Given that this can not realisitically fail, only in OOM or OOM-like
> situations in which case we abort anyway it mght be enough just writing:
>
> pa_assert_se(MPCreateSemaphore(UINT_MAX, value, &s->sema) == 0);
>
> (Assuming that success is signalled by retval == 0 on MacOSX)
>
> > +void pa_semaphore_free(pa_semaphore *s) {
> > + pa_assert(s);
> > + MPDeleteSemaphore(s->sema);
>
> Same here.
>
> > + pa_xfree(s);
> > +}
> > +
> > +void pa_semaphore_post(pa_semaphore *s) {
> > + pa_assert(s);
> > + MPSignalSemaphore(s->sema);
>
> And here.
>
> > +}
> > +
> > +void pa_semaphore_wait(pa_semaphore *s) {
> > + pa_assert(s);
> > + /* should probably check return value (-ve is error), noErr is ok. */
> > + MPWaitOnSemaphore(s->sema, kDurationForever);
>
> And here.
Ok, done. See the patch below.
Daniel
>From 26df2fbae6d9215a3ae084876fb5f79e4d9cf4f0 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Kim Lester <kim@dfusion.com.au>
Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2009 09:23:39 +0800
Subject: [PATCH] Mac OS X: add semaphore implementation
2009-10-19 12:48:00 +02:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
2013-04-02 13:10:39 +02:00
|
|
|
static char *sem_name(char *fn, size_t l, int id) {
|
|
|
|
|
pa_snprintf(fn, l, "/pulse-sem-%u-%u", getpid(), id);
|
|
|
|
|
return fn;
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
pa_semaphore *pa_semaphore_new(unsigned value) {
|
Mac OS X: add semaphore implementation
On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 11:57:04PM +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> On Wed, 16.09.09 15:15, Daniel Mack (daniel@caiaq.de) wrote:
>
> > + s = pa_xnew(pa_semaphore, 1);
> > + MPCreateSemaphore(UINT_MAX, value, &(s->sema));
> > + pa_assert(s->sema != 0);
>
> Hmm, I'd prefer if the ret val of MPCreateSemaphore() would be checked
> here.
>
> Also I find it a bit weird checking for s->sema, though not
> initializing it to 0 in the beginning. If the call actually failed,
> then the assert will check uninitialized memory. Also, comparing
> pointers with 0 sucks. That should be NULL.
>
> Given that this can not realisitically fail, only in OOM or OOM-like
> situations in which case we abort anyway it mght be enough just writing:
>
> pa_assert_se(MPCreateSemaphore(UINT_MAX, value, &s->sema) == 0);
>
> (Assuming that success is signalled by retval == 0 on MacOSX)
>
> > +void pa_semaphore_free(pa_semaphore *s) {
> > + pa_assert(s);
> > + MPDeleteSemaphore(s->sema);
>
> Same here.
>
> > + pa_xfree(s);
> > +}
> > +
> > +void pa_semaphore_post(pa_semaphore *s) {
> > + pa_assert(s);
> > + MPSignalSemaphore(s->sema);
>
> And here.
>
> > +}
> > +
> > +void pa_semaphore_wait(pa_semaphore *s) {
> > + pa_assert(s);
> > + /* should probably check return value (-ve is error), noErr is ok. */
> > + MPWaitOnSemaphore(s->sema, kDurationForever);
>
> And here.
Ok, done. See the patch below.
Daniel
>From 26df2fbae6d9215a3ae084876fb5f79e4d9cf4f0 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Kim Lester <kim@dfusion.com.au>
Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2009 09:23:39 +0800
Subject: [PATCH] Mac OS X: add semaphore implementation
2009-10-19 12:48:00 +02:00
|
|
|
pa_semaphore *s;
|
2013-04-02 13:10:39 +02:00
|
|
|
char fn[32];
|
Mac OS X: add semaphore implementation
On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 11:57:04PM +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> On Wed, 16.09.09 15:15, Daniel Mack (daniel@caiaq.de) wrote:
>
> > + s = pa_xnew(pa_semaphore, 1);
> > + MPCreateSemaphore(UINT_MAX, value, &(s->sema));
> > + pa_assert(s->sema != 0);
>
> Hmm, I'd prefer if the ret val of MPCreateSemaphore() would be checked
> here.
>
> Also I find it a bit weird checking for s->sema, though not
> initializing it to 0 in the beginning. If the call actually failed,
> then the assert will check uninitialized memory. Also, comparing
> pointers with 0 sucks. That should be NULL.
>
> Given that this can not realisitically fail, only in OOM or OOM-like
> situations in which case we abort anyway it mght be enough just writing:
>
> pa_assert_se(MPCreateSemaphore(UINT_MAX, value, &s->sema) == 0);
>
> (Assuming that success is signalled by retval == 0 on MacOSX)
>
> > +void pa_semaphore_free(pa_semaphore *s) {
> > + pa_assert(s);
> > + MPDeleteSemaphore(s->sema);
>
> Same here.
>
> > + pa_xfree(s);
> > +}
> > +
> > +void pa_semaphore_post(pa_semaphore *s) {
> > + pa_assert(s);
> > + MPSignalSemaphore(s->sema);
>
> And here.
>
> > +}
> > +
> > +void pa_semaphore_wait(pa_semaphore *s) {
> > + pa_assert(s);
> > + /* should probably check return value (-ve is error), noErr is ok. */
> > + MPWaitOnSemaphore(s->sema, kDurationForever);
>
> And here.
Ok, done. See the patch below.
Daniel
>From 26df2fbae6d9215a3ae084876fb5f79e4d9cf4f0 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Kim Lester <kim@dfusion.com.au>
Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2009 09:23:39 +0800
Subject: [PATCH] Mac OS X: add semaphore implementation
2009-10-19 12:48:00 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
s = pa_xnew(pa_semaphore, 1);
|
2013-04-02 13:10:39 +02:00
|
|
|
s->id = pa_atomic_inc(&id_counter);
|
|
|
|
|
sem_name(fn, sizeof(fn), s->id);
|
|
|
|
|
sem_unlink(fn); /* in case an old stale semaphore is left around */
|
|
|
|
|
pa_assert_se(s->sem = sem_open(fn, O_CREAT|O_EXCL, 0700, value));
|
|
|
|
|
pa_assert(s->sem != SEM_FAILED);
|
Mac OS X: add semaphore implementation
On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 11:57:04PM +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> On Wed, 16.09.09 15:15, Daniel Mack (daniel@caiaq.de) wrote:
>
> > + s = pa_xnew(pa_semaphore, 1);
> > + MPCreateSemaphore(UINT_MAX, value, &(s->sema));
> > + pa_assert(s->sema != 0);
>
> Hmm, I'd prefer if the ret val of MPCreateSemaphore() would be checked
> here.
>
> Also I find it a bit weird checking for s->sema, though not
> initializing it to 0 in the beginning. If the call actually failed,
> then the assert will check uninitialized memory. Also, comparing
> pointers with 0 sucks. That should be NULL.
>
> Given that this can not realisitically fail, only in OOM or OOM-like
> situations in which case we abort anyway it mght be enough just writing:
>
> pa_assert_se(MPCreateSemaphore(UINT_MAX, value, &s->sema) == 0);
>
> (Assuming that success is signalled by retval == 0 on MacOSX)
>
> > +void pa_semaphore_free(pa_semaphore *s) {
> > + pa_assert(s);
> > + MPDeleteSemaphore(s->sema);
>
> Same here.
>
> > + pa_xfree(s);
> > +}
> > +
> > +void pa_semaphore_post(pa_semaphore *s) {
> > + pa_assert(s);
> > + MPSignalSemaphore(s->sema);
>
> And here.
>
> > +}
> > +
> > +void pa_semaphore_wait(pa_semaphore *s) {
> > + pa_assert(s);
> > + /* should probably check return value (-ve is error), noErr is ok. */
> > + MPWaitOnSemaphore(s->sema, kDurationForever);
>
> And here.
Ok, done. See the patch below.
Daniel
>From 26df2fbae6d9215a3ae084876fb5f79e4d9cf4f0 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Kim Lester <kim@dfusion.com.au>
Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2009 09:23:39 +0800
Subject: [PATCH] Mac OS X: add semaphore implementation
2009-10-19 12:48:00 +02:00
|
|
|
return s;
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
void pa_semaphore_free(pa_semaphore *s) {
|
2013-04-02 13:10:39 +02:00
|
|
|
char fn[32];
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac OS X: add semaphore implementation
On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 11:57:04PM +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> On Wed, 16.09.09 15:15, Daniel Mack (daniel@caiaq.de) wrote:
>
> > + s = pa_xnew(pa_semaphore, 1);
> > + MPCreateSemaphore(UINT_MAX, value, &(s->sema));
> > + pa_assert(s->sema != 0);
>
> Hmm, I'd prefer if the ret val of MPCreateSemaphore() would be checked
> here.
>
> Also I find it a bit weird checking for s->sema, though not
> initializing it to 0 in the beginning. If the call actually failed,
> then the assert will check uninitialized memory. Also, comparing
> pointers with 0 sucks. That should be NULL.
>
> Given that this can not realisitically fail, only in OOM or OOM-like
> situations in which case we abort anyway it mght be enough just writing:
>
> pa_assert_se(MPCreateSemaphore(UINT_MAX, value, &s->sema) == 0);
>
> (Assuming that success is signalled by retval == 0 on MacOSX)
>
> > +void pa_semaphore_free(pa_semaphore *s) {
> > + pa_assert(s);
> > + MPDeleteSemaphore(s->sema);
>
> Same here.
>
> > + pa_xfree(s);
> > +}
> > +
> > +void pa_semaphore_post(pa_semaphore *s) {
> > + pa_assert(s);
> > + MPSignalSemaphore(s->sema);
>
> And here.
>
> > +}
> > +
> > +void pa_semaphore_wait(pa_semaphore *s) {
> > + pa_assert(s);
> > + /* should probably check return value (-ve is error), noErr is ok. */
> > + MPWaitOnSemaphore(s->sema, kDurationForever);
>
> And here.
Ok, done. See the patch below.
Daniel
>From 26df2fbae6d9215a3ae084876fb5f79e4d9cf4f0 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Kim Lester <kim@dfusion.com.au>
Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2009 09:23:39 +0800
Subject: [PATCH] Mac OS X: add semaphore implementation
2009-10-19 12:48:00 +02:00
|
|
|
pa_assert(s);
|
2013-04-02 13:10:39 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
pa_assert_se(sem_close(s->sem) == 0);
|
|
|
|
|
sem_name(fn, sizeof(fn), s->id);
|
|
|
|
|
pa_assert_se(sem_unlink(fn) == 0);
|
Mac OS X: add semaphore implementation
On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 11:57:04PM +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> On Wed, 16.09.09 15:15, Daniel Mack (daniel@caiaq.de) wrote:
>
> > + s = pa_xnew(pa_semaphore, 1);
> > + MPCreateSemaphore(UINT_MAX, value, &(s->sema));
> > + pa_assert(s->sema != 0);
>
> Hmm, I'd prefer if the ret val of MPCreateSemaphore() would be checked
> here.
>
> Also I find it a bit weird checking for s->sema, though not
> initializing it to 0 in the beginning. If the call actually failed,
> then the assert will check uninitialized memory. Also, comparing
> pointers with 0 sucks. That should be NULL.
>
> Given that this can not realisitically fail, only in OOM or OOM-like
> situations in which case we abort anyway it mght be enough just writing:
>
> pa_assert_se(MPCreateSemaphore(UINT_MAX, value, &s->sema) == 0);
>
> (Assuming that success is signalled by retval == 0 on MacOSX)
>
> > +void pa_semaphore_free(pa_semaphore *s) {
> > + pa_assert(s);
> > + MPDeleteSemaphore(s->sema);
>
> Same here.
>
> > + pa_xfree(s);
> > +}
> > +
> > +void pa_semaphore_post(pa_semaphore *s) {
> > + pa_assert(s);
> > + MPSignalSemaphore(s->sema);
>
> And here.
>
> > +}
> > +
> > +void pa_semaphore_wait(pa_semaphore *s) {
> > + pa_assert(s);
> > + /* should probably check return value (-ve is error), noErr is ok. */
> > + MPWaitOnSemaphore(s->sema, kDurationForever);
>
> And here.
Ok, done. See the patch below.
Daniel
>From 26df2fbae6d9215a3ae084876fb5f79e4d9cf4f0 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Kim Lester <kim@dfusion.com.au>
Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2009 09:23:39 +0800
Subject: [PATCH] Mac OS X: add semaphore implementation
2009-10-19 12:48:00 +02:00
|
|
|
pa_xfree(s);
|
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
void pa_semaphore_post(pa_semaphore *s) {
|
|
|
|
|
pa_assert(s);
|
2013-04-02 13:10:39 +02:00
|
|
|
pa_assert_se(sem_post(s->sem) == 0);
|
Mac OS X: add semaphore implementation
On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 11:57:04PM +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> On Wed, 16.09.09 15:15, Daniel Mack (daniel@caiaq.de) wrote:
>
> > + s = pa_xnew(pa_semaphore, 1);
> > + MPCreateSemaphore(UINT_MAX, value, &(s->sema));
> > + pa_assert(s->sema != 0);
>
> Hmm, I'd prefer if the ret val of MPCreateSemaphore() would be checked
> here.
>
> Also I find it a bit weird checking for s->sema, though not
> initializing it to 0 in the beginning. If the call actually failed,
> then the assert will check uninitialized memory. Also, comparing
> pointers with 0 sucks. That should be NULL.
>
> Given that this can not realisitically fail, only in OOM or OOM-like
> situations in which case we abort anyway it mght be enough just writing:
>
> pa_assert_se(MPCreateSemaphore(UINT_MAX, value, &s->sema) == 0);
>
> (Assuming that success is signalled by retval == 0 on MacOSX)
>
> > +void pa_semaphore_free(pa_semaphore *s) {
> > + pa_assert(s);
> > + MPDeleteSemaphore(s->sema);
>
> Same here.
>
> > + pa_xfree(s);
> > +}
> > +
> > +void pa_semaphore_post(pa_semaphore *s) {
> > + pa_assert(s);
> > + MPSignalSemaphore(s->sema);
>
> And here.
>
> > +}
> > +
> > +void pa_semaphore_wait(pa_semaphore *s) {
> > + pa_assert(s);
> > + /* should probably check return value (-ve is error), noErr is ok. */
> > + MPWaitOnSemaphore(s->sema, kDurationForever);
>
> And here.
Ok, done. See the patch below.
Daniel
>From 26df2fbae6d9215a3ae084876fb5f79e4d9cf4f0 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Kim Lester <kim@dfusion.com.au>
Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2009 09:23:39 +0800
Subject: [PATCH] Mac OS X: add semaphore implementation
2009-10-19 12:48:00 +02:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
void pa_semaphore_wait(pa_semaphore *s) {
|
2013-04-02 13:10:39 +02:00
|
|
|
int ret;
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac OS X: add semaphore implementation
On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 11:57:04PM +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> On Wed, 16.09.09 15:15, Daniel Mack (daniel@caiaq.de) wrote:
>
> > + s = pa_xnew(pa_semaphore, 1);
> > + MPCreateSemaphore(UINT_MAX, value, &(s->sema));
> > + pa_assert(s->sema != 0);
>
> Hmm, I'd prefer if the ret val of MPCreateSemaphore() would be checked
> here.
>
> Also I find it a bit weird checking for s->sema, though not
> initializing it to 0 in the beginning. If the call actually failed,
> then the assert will check uninitialized memory. Also, comparing
> pointers with 0 sucks. That should be NULL.
>
> Given that this can not realisitically fail, only in OOM or OOM-like
> situations in which case we abort anyway it mght be enough just writing:
>
> pa_assert_se(MPCreateSemaphore(UINT_MAX, value, &s->sema) == 0);
>
> (Assuming that success is signalled by retval == 0 on MacOSX)
>
> > +void pa_semaphore_free(pa_semaphore *s) {
> > + pa_assert(s);
> > + MPDeleteSemaphore(s->sema);
>
> Same here.
>
> > + pa_xfree(s);
> > +}
> > +
> > +void pa_semaphore_post(pa_semaphore *s) {
> > + pa_assert(s);
> > + MPSignalSemaphore(s->sema);
>
> And here.
>
> > +}
> > +
> > +void pa_semaphore_wait(pa_semaphore *s) {
> > + pa_assert(s);
> > + /* should probably check return value (-ve is error), noErr is ok. */
> > + MPWaitOnSemaphore(s->sema, kDurationForever);
>
> And here.
Ok, done. See the patch below.
Daniel
>From 26df2fbae6d9215a3ae084876fb5f79e4d9cf4f0 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Kim Lester <kim@dfusion.com.au>
Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2009 09:23:39 +0800
Subject: [PATCH] Mac OS X: add semaphore implementation
2009-10-19 12:48:00 +02:00
|
|
|
pa_assert(s);
|
2013-04-02 13:10:39 +02:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
do {
|
|
|
|
|
ret = sem_wait(s->sem);
|
|
|
|
|
} while (ret < 0 && errno == EINTR);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
pa_assert(ret == 0);
|
Mac OS X: add semaphore implementation
On Wed, Sep 16, 2009 at 11:57:04PM +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
> On Wed, 16.09.09 15:15, Daniel Mack (daniel@caiaq.de) wrote:
>
> > + s = pa_xnew(pa_semaphore, 1);
> > + MPCreateSemaphore(UINT_MAX, value, &(s->sema));
> > + pa_assert(s->sema != 0);
>
> Hmm, I'd prefer if the ret val of MPCreateSemaphore() would be checked
> here.
>
> Also I find it a bit weird checking for s->sema, though not
> initializing it to 0 in the beginning. If the call actually failed,
> then the assert will check uninitialized memory. Also, comparing
> pointers with 0 sucks. That should be NULL.
>
> Given that this can not realisitically fail, only in OOM or OOM-like
> situations in which case we abort anyway it mght be enough just writing:
>
> pa_assert_se(MPCreateSemaphore(UINT_MAX, value, &s->sema) == 0);
>
> (Assuming that success is signalled by retval == 0 on MacOSX)
>
> > +void pa_semaphore_free(pa_semaphore *s) {
> > + pa_assert(s);
> > + MPDeleteSemaphore(s->sema);
>
> Same here.
>
> > + pa_xfree(s);
> > +}
> > +
> > +void pa_semaphore_post(pa_semaphore *s) {
> > + pa_assert(s);
> > + MPSignalSemaphore(s->sema);
>
> And here.
>
> > +}
> > +
> > +void pa_semaphore_wait(pa_semaphore *s) {
> > + pa_assert(s);
> > + /* should probably check return value (-ve is error), noErr is ok. */
> > + MPWaitOnSemaphore(s->sema, kDurationForever);
>
> And here.
Ok, done. See the patch below.
Daniel
>From 26df2fbae6d9215a3ae084876fb5f79e4d9cf4f0 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Kim Lester <kim@dfusion.com.au>
Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2009 09:23:39 +0800
Subject: [PATCH] Mac OS X: add semaphore implementation
2009-10-19 12:48:00 +02:00
|
|
|
}
|