Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 10 May 2005 02:15:58 -0400 (EDT)
From:      Daniel Eischen <deischen@freebsd.org>
To:        Suleiman Souhlal <ssouhlal@freebsd.org>
Cc:        freebsd-stable <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: Performance issue
Message-ID:  <Pine.GSO.4.43.0505100209360.1139-100000@sea.ntplx.net>
In-Reply-To: <378E5258-A3FA-4B3E-8F3E-2E330417966C@FreeBSD.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, 10 May 2005, Suleiman Souhlal wrote:

> Hi,
>
> On May 10, 2005, at 1:24 AM, Daniel Eischen wrote:
>
> > No, libc_r wraps execve() and a lot of other syscalls that libpthread
> > or libthr don't need to.  Take a look at libc_r/uthread/
> > uthread_execve.c
> > and you will see it sets the signal mask before exec()ing.
>
> Couldn't we do the same thing in libpthread, in the not-threaded case?
> I apologize if I'm asking stupid questions.. :)

No ;-)  We don't want to wrap functions unecessarily.  Applications
not linked to a thread library still have to use the actual syscall,
so there's no point in wrapping extra functions just to make
sigprocmask() faster when linked with libpthread.

-- 
DE



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.GSO.4.43.0505100209360.1139-100000>