Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Re: pthread library related
0 views
Skip to first unread message
Christos Zoulas
Jun 23, 2016, 11:35:16 AM6/23/16
to
In article <20160520091...@britannica.bec.de>,
Joerg Sonnenberger <jo...@bec.de> wrote:
>On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 01:36:29PM -0400, Christos Zoulas wrote:
>> You can see how FreeBSD is implementing them; it is a lot of code to do
>> this and would require some architectural review. The relevant files are:
>>
>> http://nxr.netbsd.org/xref/src-freebsd/lib/libthr/thread/thr_pshared.c
>> http://nxr.netbsd.org/xref/src-freebsd/lib/libthr/thread/thr_barrierattr.c
>> http://nxr.netbsd.org/xref/src-freebsd/sys/kern/kern_umtx.c
>>
>> We don't have such mutex functionality in our kernel. Implementing this
>> would be a GSoC project in itself.
>
>I don't think we want to use futexes in general. I'm not even sure I
>care about performance for something horrible like "robust" mutexes at
>all. A good starting point might to just extend the existing semaphores,
>if necessary.
Yes, but should we commit the proposed ENOSYS stubs in the meantime just
to have the functions available? I am not sure...
christos
Joerg Sonnenberger <jo...@bec.de> wrote:
>On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 01:36:29PM -0400, Christos Zoulas wrote:
>> You can see how FreeBSD is implementing them; it is a lot of code to do
>> this and would require some architectural review. The relevant files are:
>>
>> http://nxr.netbsd.org/xref/src-freebsd/lib/libthr/thread/thr_pshared.c
>> http://nxr.netbsd.org/xref/src-freebsd/lib/libthr/thread/thr_barrierattr.c
>> http://nxr.netbsd.org/xref/src-freebsd/sys/kern/kern_umtx.c
>>
>> We don't have such mutex functionality in our kernel. Implementing this
>> would be a GSoC project in itself.
>
>I don't think we want to use futexes in general. I'm not even sure I
>care about performance for something horrible like "robust" mutexes at
>all. A good starting point might to just extend the existing semaphores,
>if necessary.
Yes, but should we commit the proposed ENOSYS stubs in the meantime just
to have the functions available? I am not sure...
christos
Joerg Sonnenberger
Jun 23, 2016, 1:26:44 PM6/23/16
to
Joerg
Christos Zoulas
Jun 23, 2016, 1:56:43 PM6/23/16
to
On Jun 23, 7:26pm, jo...@bec.de (Joerg Sonnenberger) wrote:
-- Subject: Re: pthread library related
| > Yes, but should we commit the proposed ENOSYS stubs in the meantime just
| > to have the functions available? I am not sure...
|
| No, that would do more harm than good.
I agree; I have ifdef'ed them out in the code. The new proposed patch is:
http://www.netbsd.org/~christos/pts-20160623.diff
christos
-- Subject: Re: pthread library related
| > Yes, but should we commit the proposed ENOSYS stubs in the meantime just
| > to have the functions available? I am not sure...
|
| No, that would do more harm than good.
http://www.netbsd.org/~christos/pts-20160623.diff
christos
Joerg Sonnenberger
Jun 23, 2016, 2:31:21 PM6/23/16
to
and a BUGS section in the man page, if you want to document them.
Joerg
Christos Zoulas
Jun 23, 2016, 2:53:47 PM6/23/16
to
0 new messages