From owner-freebsd-hackers Thu Oct 5 16:17:58 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from gw.nectar.com (gw.nectar.com [208.42.49.153]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 645CB37B502 for ; Thu, 5 Oct 2000 16:17:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hamlet.nectar.com (hamlet.nectar.com [10.0.1.102]) by gw.nectar.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5C27E1925E for ; Thu, 5 Oct 2000 18:17:51 -0500 (CDT) Received: (from nectar@localhost) by hamlet.nectar.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id SAA68514 for freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org; Thu, 5 Oct 2000 18:17:51 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from nectar@spawn.nectar.com) Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2000 18:17:51 -0500 From: "Jacques A. Vidrine" To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: _THREAD_SAFE in libc Message-ID: <20001005181751.A68499@hamlet.nectar.com> Mail-Followup-To: "Jacques A. Vidrine" , freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i X-Url: http://www.nectar.com/ Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Is it ok to use pthread_rwlock* and other such primitives in code in src/lib/libc (when _THREAD_SAFE is defined, of course)? I ask because I don't see any other code doing this. Perhaps there is a private interface to use? Perhaps I'm barking up the wrong tree? Context: I want to make nsdispatch thread safe (inasmuch as possible-- e.g. I'm not tackling the resolver), so I need to protect its data structures. -- Jacques Vidrine / n@nectar.com / jvidrine@verio.net / nectar@FreeBSD.org To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message