Date: Sat, 16 Nov 2002 16:49:50 +0000 From: Doug Rabson <dfr@nlsystems.com> To: Daniel Eischen <eischen@vigrid.com>, arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: What to do with userland *context() functions Message-ID: <200211161649.50346.dfr@nlsystems.com> In-Reply-To: <3DD66393.40AFC73@vigrid.com> References: <3DD66393.40AFC73@vigrid.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Saturday 16 November 2002 3:26 pm, Daniel Eischen wrote: > After adding *context() as system calls, we no longer > need the userland versions. But I would like to use > them in libc_r and they might be useful to someone else > writing their own userland threading library. As of > now, we need different variants of them for libpthread, > so they aren't expected to be used there. > > How do folks feel about keeping them in libc, but named > as _getctx, _setctx, _swapctx? They would be similar > to _setjmp/_longjmp which don't save/restore the signal > mask. It'll add a little bloat to libc and they are > only present for i386 and alpha archs. > > I'll have them repo-copied to libc_r if the consensus is > to remove them from libc. I'm not quite sure why libc_r can't use the standard swapcontext system=20 call. Is it something to do with the signal mask? It seems to defeat=20 the object to create a bunch of nice standard functions for low-level=20 thread switching and then not use them. Plus it means we need to=20 maintain two (or three) variations of the same code, which seems wrong. --=20 Doug Rabson=09=09=09=09Mail: dfr@nlsystems.com =09=09=09=09=09Phone: +44 20 8348 6160 To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200211161649.50346.dfr>