From owner-freebsd-hackers Sat Oct 21 14:34:54 1995 Return-Path: owner-hackers Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) id OAA13636 for hackers-outgoing; Sat, 21 Oct 1995 14:34:54 -0700 Received: from werple.net.au (0@werple.mira.net.au [203.9.190.18]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) with ESMTP id OAA13616 for ; Sat, 21 Oct 1995 14:34:49 -0700 Received: from cimaxp1.UUCP (Ucimlogi@localhost) by werple.net.au (8.7/8.7.1) with UUCP id HAA06203 for hackers@freebsd.org; Sun, 22 Oct 1995 07:30:58 +1000 (EST) Message-Id: <199510212130.HAA06203@werple.net.au> X-Authentication-Warning: werple.net.au: Ucimlogi set sender to cimaxp1!jb using -f Received: by cimaxp1.cimlogic.com.au; (5.65/1.1.8.2/10Sep95-0953AM) id AA25404; Sun, 22 Oct 1995 07:05:35 +1000 From: John Birrell Subject: Re: A quick vote on pthreads PLZ To: bde@zeta.org.au (Bruce Evans) Date: Sun, 22 Oct 1995 07:05:34 +1000 (EST) Cc: hackers@FreeBSD.org, jb@cimlogic.com.au In-Reply-To: <199510210630.QAA07233@godzilla.zeta.org.au> from "Bruce Evans" at Oct 21, 95 04:30:18 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23] Content-Type: text Sender: owner-hackers@FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > > >I believe there aren't that many changes in the base system.. > > >the diffs to libc are probably going in anyhow under #ifdef THREAD_SAFE > >.. > >so what is your vote? > > < 10 ifdefs: libc > > 100 ifdefs: ports > > I don't think the library can be made thread safe with < 100 changes. What True. > would it do with all the places that return a pointer to static storage? These fall into three categories: (1) Functions which have a *_r() reentrant equivalent like readdir_r which have extra arguments so that static storage is avoided. (2) Functions which malloc memory and return that instead. The MIT code does this in places. (3) Dunno what the solution is. > > Bruce > > -- John Birrell CIMlogic Pty Ltd jb@cimlogic.com.au 119 Cecil Street Ph +61 3 9690 9600 South Melbourne Vic 3205 Fax +61 3 9690 6650 Australia Mob +61 18 353 137