From owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Jul 17 16:30:20 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: cvs-all@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 27F1C37B401; Thu, 17 Jul 2003 16:30:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.pcnet.com (mail.pcnet.com [204.213.232.4]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4CB7D43F75; Thu, 17 Jul 2003 16:30:17 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from eischen@vigrid.com) Received: from mail.pcnet.com (mail.pcnet.com [204.213.232.4]) by mail.pcnet.com (8.12.8/8.12.1) with ESMTP id h6HNUBAI017483; Thu, 17 Jul 2003 19:30:11 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 17 Jul 2003 19:30:11 -0400 (EDT) From: Daniel Eischen X-Sender: eischen@pcnet5.pcnet.com To: Julian Elischer In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII cc: cvs-src@FreeBSD.org cc: src-committers@FreeBSD.org cc: David Xu cc: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/lib/libpthread Makefile src/lib/libpthread/test thr_concurrency.c thr_create.c thr_find_thread.c thr_init.c thr_kern.c thr_nanosleep.c thr_private.h thr_sig.c thr_sigmask.c ... X-BeenThere: cvs-all@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: CVS commit messages for the entire tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 17 Jul 2003 23:30:20 -0000 On Thu, 17 Jul 2003, Julian Elischer wrote: > This makes it possible to make the same code run in the same mode as > libthr. > > we have not compared them for performance yet. > it is also not fully decided how this will be done in production.. > will we have 2 libraries and selct one? Or will it be possible to > use a run-time selector? > At the moment it is a compile time selection as to which you make and > a run-time (via libmap) decision wich you link to.. Or -l There is not much code removed when compiling for 1:1, and David actually had an earlier version of it that was based on just a variable being set to true or false. If the library knew (at init time) if it was called libpthread or libthread, it could automatically do the right thing. > We'll probably make a libpthread-1:1.so and a libpthread-m:n.so. > As they are the same code the interface is pretty much guaranteed to be > the same.. Note that like libthr, the 1:1 version is incapable of doing > process-scope threads, but otherwise they are compatible. I'd like to make libpthread and libthread (ala Solaris). Note that even in 1:1 mode, POSIX semantics for priority ceiling and inheritence mutexes, as well as wakeup ordering for condition variables, still work. -- Dan Eischen