From owner-freebsd-threads@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Oct 29 23:58:22 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-threads@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 09C6816A4CE; Fri, 29 Oct 2004 23:58:22 +0000 (GMT) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org [216.136.204.21]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EC60143D41; Fri, 29 Oct 2004 23:58:21 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from davidxu@freebsd.org) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (davidxu@localhost [127.0.0.1]) i9TNwJsg020817; Fri, 29 Oct 2004 23:58:20 GMT (envelope-from davidxu@freebsd.org) Message-ID: <4182D91F.6020603@freebsd.org> Date: Sat, 30 Oct 2004 07:58:23 +0800 From: David Xu User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD i386; en-US; rv:1.7.2) Gecko/20040921 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Ken Smith References: <41817EE4.9080302@elischer.org> <20041029010822.GA12081@electra.cse.Buffalo.EDU> <20041029040931.GA920@frontfree.net> <4182A431.2050001@elischer.org> <20041029202458.GE9533@electra.cse.Buffalo.EDU> In-Reply-To: <20041029202458.GE9533@electra.cse.Buffalo.EDU> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit cc: Daniel Eischen cc: threads@freebsd.org cc: re@freebsd.org cc: Julian Elischer cc: John Baldwin Subject: Re: MFC req for 5.x/5.3 X-BeenThere: freebsd-threads@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Threading on FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 23:58:22 -0000 Ken Smith wrote: >Yup. That's why I thought we would need to be a little bit careful >with this, it's a bit more complicated than it first seems. There >is a chance for example that a piece that's not being MFC-ed added >an extra #include and if the new code that's being MFC-ed relies on >that it can be a bit tough to catch with the first attempt. My >asking for caution on this wasn't a reflection on Julian, I'd ask >anyone to be this careful about this particular MFC because it doesn't >look like it's a straight "MFC everything". And doing an "MFC everything" >for a library like this is risky at the RC2 stage, it's possible pieces >of what gets swept in could have an impact (possibly negative) on the >packages that use it. It would be a bit of a gamble. > >Thanks for your work on this guys. Greatly appreciated. > > > Because the library in RELENG_5 can not pass my stress test: http://people.freebsd.org/~davidxu/thread_stress/joinstress.c I think it is a real world test case for web server like program, without this patches, I don't think libpthread can be used under heavily loaded environment. David Xu