06.07.2023 13:41, Murphy Zhou пишет:
Signed-off-by: Stas Sergeev <stsp2@xxxxxxxxx>
---
src/t_ofd_locks.c | 73 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----------------
1 file changed, 47 insertions(+), 26 deletions(-)
diff --git a/src/t_ofd_locks.c b/src/t_ofd_locks.c
index e77f2659..daa6f96c 100644
--- a/src/t_ofd_locks.c
+++ b/src/t_ofd_locks.c
@@ -297,6 +297,7 @@ int main(int argc, char **argv)
semid = semget(semkey, 2, IPC_CREAT|IPC_EXCL);
if (semid < 0 && errno == EEXIST) {
/* remove sem set after one round of test */
+ semid = semget(semkey, 2, IPC_CREAT);
if (semctl(semid, 2, IPC_RMID, semu) == -1)
Good catch. This RMID is useless unless we have got the existing
semaphore. According to SEMGET(2), seems should be:
semid = semget(semkey, 2, 0);
to obtain an existing semaphore?
Yes, I just wanted to avoid the purely
theoretical condition when someone
else removed this sem right before we
did second semget(). So I added IPC_CREAT
just as a safety measure.
Should I remove it?
The while loop makes sure we get the semaphore before continuing
the test. It's been some time, I'm not sure but now I really can't see
this really hurts.
What while loop do you mean and what
doesn't hurt? Does the rest of the patch
look ok?
