You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
{{ message }}
Repository navigation
Race condition in the shared memory implementation, missing sync in read_sm and write_sm #195
Currently, In the shared memory c++ implementation If the writer updates the simulation state while the reader is reading it, the reader might get corrupted data (half old state, half new state).
The write_SM function writes to the shared memory buffer using without acquiring a lock, which will let the read_sm function 'read' simultaneously when write_Sm is running 'write'. This should not happen, this will result in corrupted data to the reader.
@pradeeban I would be interested in solving this issue. I had just learned something of similar concept(locking) in university the previous semester (in DBMS course). Would love to practically implement the concept.
@pradeeban do you think we should have some more samples in demo especially for languages other than python? If so do let me know I will create an separate issue for that.
I will be signing off for today, will try to get as many issues resolved by tomorrow!
@GREENRAT-K405 More samples are always nice. But as of now, without the real use case running on, these will likely become toy samples, which I do not like much. Let's see.
Activity
GREENRAT-K405 commentedon Feb 2, 2026
@pradeeban I would be interested in solving this issue. I had just learned something of similar concept(locking) in university the previous semester (in DBMS course). Would love to practically implement the concept.
GREENRAT-K405 commentedon Feb 3, 2026
@pradeeban do you think we should have some more samples in demo especially for languages other than python? If so do let me know I will create an separate issue for that.
I will be signing off for today, will try to get as many issues resolved by tomorrow!
pradeeban commentedon Feb 4, 2026
@GREENRAT-K405 More samples are always nice. But as of now, without the real use case running on, these will likely become toy samples, which I do not like much. Let's see.
fix(shm): serialise concurrent writers with seq# + POSIX semaphore (f…
fix(shm): serialise concurrent writers with seq# + POSIX semaphore (f…
fix(shm): serialise concurrent writers with seq# + POSIX semaphore (f…
fix(shm): serialise concurrent writers with seq# + POSIX semaphore (f…
pradeeban commentedon Jun 30, 2026
Thanks, merged.