Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 5 Jun 2003 12:12:59 -0400 (EDT)
From:      Daniel Eischen <eischen@pcnet.com>
To:        Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com>
Cc:        freebsd-threads@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: FreeBSD pthread_equal "bug"
Message-ID:  <Pine.GSO.4.10.10306051209090.230-100000@pcnet5.pcnet.com>
In-Reply-To: <3EDF2C6B.7A8E5C21@mindspring.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, 5 Jun 2003, Terry Lambert wrote:

> Daniel Eischen wrote:
> > Process id's can wrap around so it can eventually happen.
> > 
> > This is a bug in the application; the implementation is allowed
> > to reuse thread id's and there are enough interfaces for an
> > application to tell when a thread terminates (pthread_join).
> > 
> > Perhaps our use of thread id's could be changes so that they
> > were cached at the end of the free thread list, but cacheing
> > them at the front seems to highlight bad applications, so
> > that's a bonus ;-)
> 
> So's not explicitly protecting dlopen(), and so's not forcing

I never committed anything that protected dlopen(), and
> rescheduling of the thread that was running at preemption time,
> when returning from an involuntary preemption. ;^).

also never committed anything to do this either.

The rtld-elf fixes were not specifically related to dlopen().
Binding of objects was not thread-safe even if dlopen() was not
used.

-- 
Dan Eischen



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.GSO.4.10.10306051209090.230-100000>