From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG  Fri Apr 11 19:50:09 2014
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115])
 (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D4ADDB8B
 for <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>; Fri, 11 Apr 2014 19:50:09 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail.netplex.net (mail.netplex.net [204.213.176.9])
 (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
 (Client CN "*.netplex.net", Issuer "RapidSSL CA" (verified OK))
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 68D8415DF
 for <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>; Fri, 11 Apr 2014 19:50:09 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from sea.ntplx.net (sea.ntplx.net [204.213.176.11])
 by mail.netplex.net (8.14.8/8.14.8/NETPLEX) with ESMTP id s3BJo7dC063686;
 Fri, 11 Apr 2014 15:50:07 -0400
X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS and Clam AntiVirus (mail.netplex.net)
X-Greylist: Message whitelisted by DRAC access database, not delayed by
 milter-greylist-4.4.3 (mail.netplex.net [204.213.176.9]);
 Fri, 11 Apr 2014 15:50:07 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2014 15:50:07 -0400 (EDT)
From: Daniel Eischen <deischen@freebsd.org>
X-X-Sender: eischen@sea.ntplx.net
To: Konstantin Belousov <kostikbel@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Stuck CLOSED sockets / sshd / zombies...
In-Reply-To: <20140411183949.GX21331@kib.kiev.ua>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.64.1404111547210.23644@sea.ntplx.net>
References: <20140409111917.GH21331@kib.kiev.ua>
 <851413886E3982D2CCFEA9D9@Mail-PC.tdx.co.uk>
 <20140410184855.GP21331@kib.kiev.ua>
 <211BD03C086DDB1A07FDF036@Mail-PC.tdx.co.uk>
 <20140411131649.GR21331@kib.kiev.ua>
 <652B8CA4866C0B9E4650430B@Mail-PC.tdx.co.uk>
 <20140411141526.GT21331@kib.kiev.ua>
 <464979E8F6FCBD7EA7DAA38B@Mail-PC.tdx.co.uk>
 <20140411160628.GV21331@kib.kiev.ua>
 <Pine.GSO.4.64.1404111320250.23129@sea.ntplx.net>
 <20140411183949.GX21331@kib.kiev.ua>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org, Karl Pielorz <kpielorz_lst@tdx.co.uk>
X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
Reply-To: Daniel Eischen <deischen@freebsd.org>
List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD
 <freebsd-hackers.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-hackers>, 
 <mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-hackers/>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers>,
 <mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2014 19:50:09 -0000

On Fri, 11 Apr 2014, Konstantin Belousov wrote:

> On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 01:23:00PM -0400, Daniel Eischen wrote:
>> On Fri, 11 Apr 2014, Konstantin Belousov wrote:
>>> The correct solution is to merge libthr into libc. Some neccessary
>>> preparations were already done, but the main work did not started yet.
>>> This is huge efforts, and it probably should be coordinated with some
>>> other ABI changes planed for libthr to support process-shared locks.
>>
>> Eek, no, I don't think that is necessary.  When we go to using real
>> structs instead of pointers for synchronization types (mutex, CV)
>> in libthr, then I don't think there will be a problem.
>
> Could you, please, clarify what do you consider not neccessary ?
> The merge, the (unrelated) ABI change, or coordination ?

Sorry, I should have elided parts of the email to which I
was not responding.  I mean merging libthr into libc.  I
think we should wait until we change mutex, CV, and perhaps
pthread to be structs, then see if merging libthr into
libc is still necessary.

-- 
DE