[SR-Users] How to build Kamailio without FUTEX reference (to use PTHREAD_MUTEX or POSIX_SEM instead)

[Daniel-Constantin Mierla]

Hello,

On 12/3/13 4:20 PM, Sotas Development wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I want to build a Kamailio version without the usage of futex. First 
> of all I notice that the  variable "use_futex" within Makefile.defs is 
> hardcoded to the value "yes". Why is that? I want to get rid of this 
> and build Kamailio without futex support. In the same file there are 
> GCC options  like -DUSE_PTHREAD_MUTEX, -DUSE_POSIX_SEM etc. So I 
> disabled the line use_futex and and added -DUSE_PTHREAD_MUTEX as follows;
>
> #use_futex= yes
> C_DEFS+=-DUSE_PTHREAD_MUTEX
>
> After building Kamailio with these options:
> Although the output of "kamailio -I" indicates that FUTEX is not used 
> (PTHREAD_MUTEX is used instead) it still uses futex sneaky as its 
> locking mechanism. I can see this after catting the content of 
> /proc/<pid>/wchan.
>
> This is because Kamailio hangs on futex after running it a while (see 
> our other issue in the topic "Kamailio stability/timing problem w.r.t. 
> registrations?").
>
> Question is; How can I build Kamailio with a locking mechanism other 
> than FUTEX? And why does the solution with Makefile.defs not work?
Maybe the compile switches got mixed over the time, as no one 
wanted/played to compile with no futex.

You should look at the following files to see if you can spot when the 
compile switch is not activated:

lock_alloc.h    lock_ops.c      lock_ops.h      lock_ops_init.h locking.h

If you cannot spot a fix, then open an issue on the tracker and should 
be investigated in the near future.

Cheers,
Daniel

-- 
Daniel-Constantin Mierla - http://www.asipto.com
http://twitter.com/#!/miconda - http://www.linkedin.com/in/miconda

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.sip-router.org/pipermail/sr-users/attachments/20131204/1d4f2d6f/attachment.html>