[#35631] [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #4558][Open] TestSocket#test_closed_read fails after r31230 — Tomoyuki Chikanaga <redmine@...>

23 messages 2011/04/06

[#35632] [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #4559][Open] Proc#== does not match the documented behaviour — Adam Prescott <redmine@...>

13 messages 2011/04/06

[#35637] [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #4561][Open] 1.9.2 requires parentheses around argument of method call in an array, where 1.8.7 did not — Dave Schweisguth <redmine@...>

9 messages 2011/04/07

[#35666] caching of the ancestor chain — Xavier Noria <fxn@...>

Why does Ruby cache the ancestors chain? I mean, not why the implementation implies that, but why it works that way conceptually.

9 messages 2011/04/09

[#35734] [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #4574][Open] Numeric#within — redmine@...

16 messages 2011/04/13

[#35753] [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #4576][Open] Range#step miss the last value, if end-exclusive and has float number — redmine@...

61 messages 2011/04/14
[#39566] [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #4576] Range#step miss the last value, if end-exclusive and has float number — Marc-Andre Lafortune <ruby-core@...> 2011/09/15

[#39590] [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #4576] Range#step miss the last value, if end-exclusive and has float number — Marc-Andre Lafortune <ruby-core@...> 2011/09/16

[#39593] Re: [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #4576] Range#step miss the last value, if end-exclusive and has float number — Tanaka Akira <akr@...> 2011/09/16

2011/9/17 Marc-Andre Lafortune <ruby-core@marc-andre.ca>:

[#39608] Re: [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #4576] Range#step miss the last value, if end-exclusive and has float number — Masahiro TANAKA <masa16.tanaka@...> 2011/09/17

I have not been watching ruby-core, but let me give a comment for this issue.

[#35765] [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #4579][Open] SecureRandom + OpenSSL may repeat with fork — redmine@...

27 messages 2011/04/15

[#35866] [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #4603][Open] lib/csv.rb: when the :encoding parameter is not provided, the encoding of CSV data is treated as ASCII-8BIT — yu nobuoka <nobuoka@...>

13 messages 2011/04/24

[#35879] [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #4610][Open] Proc#curry behavior is inconsistent with lambdas containing default argument values — Joshua Ballanco <jballanc@...>

11 messages 2011/04/25

[#35883] [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #4611][Open] [BUG] Segementation fault reported — Deryl Doucette <me@...>

15 messages 2011/04/25

[#35895] [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #4614][Open] [RFC/PATCH] thread_pthread.c: lower RUBY_STACK_MIN_LIMIT to 64K — Eric Wong <normalperson@...>

10 messages 2011/04/25

[ruby-core:35662] Re: [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #4558][Open] TestSocket#test_closed_read fails after r31230

From: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...>
Date: 2011-04-08 16:13:57 UTC
List: ruby-core #35662
2011/4/8 Eric Wong <normalperson@yhbt.net>:
> KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > ----------------------------------------
>> > Bug #4558: TestSocket#test_closed_read fails after r31230
>> > http://redmine.ruby-lang.org/issues/4558
>>
>> I think current rb_io_close() is broken. We have to call rb_thread_fd_close()
>> before releasing GVL.
>>
>> Eric, Am I missing something?
>
> You are correct.
>
> I can't reproduce the test failure on x86_64-linux but the
> following patch should fix a race condition:
>
> diff --git a/io.c b/io.c
> index 7ce7148..b79cc5e 100644
> --- a/io.c
> +++ b/io.c
> @@ -3685,8 +3685,8 @@ rb_io_close(VALUE io)
> if (fptr->fd < 0) return Qnil;
>
> fd = fptr->fd;
> - b_io_fptr_cleanup(fptr, FALSE);
> rb_thread_fd_close(fd);
> + b_io_fptr_cleanup(fptr, FALSE);

After while thinking, I conclude I was wrong. If rb_io_fptr_cleanup()
raise a exception, We don't have to kill other threads. So, now I'm
incline to revert r31230. Hmm...

In This Thread