<html>
<head>
<base href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/">
</head>
<body>
<p>
<div>
<b><a class="bz_bug_link
bz_status_NEW "
title="NEW - Concurrent call to glClientWaitSync results in segfault in one of the waiters."
href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=98172#c45">Comment # 45</a>
on <a class="bz_bug_link
bz_status_NEW "
title="NEW - Concurrent call to glClientWaitSync results in segfault in one of the waiters."
href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=98172">bug 98172</a>
from <span class="vcard"><a class="email" href="mailto:shinji.suzuki@gmail.com" title="Suzuki, Shinji <shinji.suzuki@gmail.com>"> <span class="fn">Suzuki, Shinji</span></a>
</span></b>
<pre><span class="quote">> feeling that solution via serialization of unref-ops blurs the nature of the
> problem that is inherent in the sock code. </span >
This concern can perhaps be obviated by inserting an explicit check.
if (screen->fence_finish(screen, pipe, fence, timeout)) {
mtx_lock(&ctx->Shared->Mutex);
if( so->fence!= NULL )
screen->fence_reference(screen, &so->fence, NULL);
mtx_unlock(&ctx->Shared->Mutex);
so->b.StatusFlag = GL_TRUE;
}</pre>
</div>
</p>
<hr>
<span>You are receiving this mail because:</span>
<ul>
<li>You are the assignee for the bug.</li>
<li>You are the QA Contact for the bug.</li>
</ul>
</body>
</html>