Comment 10 for bug 332002

On Jueves 19 Marzo 2009, Robert Brown wrote:
> 2009/3/16 Gábor Melis <email address hidden>:
> > I committed the stuff referenced above as 1.0.26.4 - 1.0.26.6. In
> > all likelihood, it won't solve your problems, but it would still be
> > interesting to see how the test added in "less pessimal waitqueues"
> > does on your system.
>
> I recently tried the semaphore-test you emailed to me again on
> sbcl 1.0.25.56, which was the release I initially complained about
> as being broken for me. Surprisingly, although my workstation had
> not been rebooted since the last runs and the sbcl binary had not
> changed, I had to run the test about 10 times before I saw a
> failure. Previously, about half the runs would fail for me.
>
> Anyway, I built sbcl 1.0.26.8 and tried the test with that version.
> It seems to work reliably now and generally the test takes a lot
> less time to run than it used to take with 1.0.25.56. I have not yet
> seen it fail.
>
> bob

I'm relieved to hear that, although I suspect it's not the end of the
story as the test that I added in "less pessimal waitqueues" really
stops my whole machine for long seconds ...