From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG  Wed Dec 10 12:04:39 2003
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 85CDF16A4CE; Wed, 10 Dec 2003 12:04:39 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail.pcnet.com (mail.pcnet.com [204.213.232.4])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 8621143D29; Wed, 10 Dec 2003 12:04:38 -0800 (PST)
	(envelope-from eischen@vigrid.com)
Received: from mail.pcnet.com (mail.pcnet.com [204.213.232.4])
	by mail.pcnet.com (8.12.10/8.12.1) with ESMTP id hBAK4bml000322;
	Wed, 10 Dec 2003 15:04:37 -0500 (EST)
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 15:04:37 -0500 (EST)
From: Daniel Eischen <eischen@vigrid.com>
X-Sender: eischen@pcnet5.pcnet.com
To: "Jacques A. Vidrine" <nectar@FreeBSD.org>
In-Reply-To: <20031210170815.GA77342@madman.celabo.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.10.10312101458230.27852-100000@pcnet5.pcnet.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
cc: current@FreeBSD.org
Subject: Re: nss and pthreads and wine, oh my!
X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current
	<freebsd-current.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 20:04:39 -0000

On Wed, 10 Dec 2003, Jacques A. Vidrine wrote:

> On Wed, Dec 10, 2003 at 12:39:59AM -0500, Daniel Eischen wrote:
> > Yes, I think libc should only call locking primitives when
> > __isthread != 0.
> 
> Hi Dan,
> 
> You don't mean that, do you?  You seem to be implying that pthread
> functions would have to be invoked in libc something like this:
> 
>   result = __isthreaded ? _pthread_mutex_trylock(&foo_lock) : 0;
>   if (result != 0)
>           /* error */;
> 
> or use the macros in reentrant.h.
> 
> But, maybe I'm just misunderstanding you.  I believe the thread
> functions are `stubbed out' in the non-thread case?

They are, but when libpthread is linked in, even if threads
are not created, there's no reason to call the pthread sync
functions if we're not threaded.  There is a bit of overhead
associated with calling these things that can be avoided
simply by checking __isthreaded.

-- 
Dan Eischen