From owner-freebsd-doc@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Aug 12 12:53:16 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-doc@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 148595C8; Tue, 12 Aug 2014 12:53:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-gw13.york.ac.uk (mail-gw13.york.ac.uk [144.32.129.163]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CF4BB2A65; Tue, 12 Aug 2014 12:53:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: from ury.york.ac.uk ([144.32.64.162]:50319) by mail-gw13.york.ac.uk with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1XHBZc-0006OR-CW; Tue, 12 Aug 2014 13:53:08 +0100 Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2014 13:53:08 +0100 (BST) From: Gavin Atkinson X-X-Sender: gavin@ury.york.ac.uk To: John Baldwin Subject: Re: man pthread In-Reply-To: <201408111409.39434.jhb@freebsd.org> Message-ID: References: <201408111409.39434.jhb@freebsd.org> User-Agent: Alpine 2.11 (BSF 23 2013-08-11) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Cc: freebsd-doc@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-doc@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: Documentation project List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2014 12:53:16 -0000 On Mon, 11 Aug 2014, John Baldwin wrote: > On Sunday, July 27, 2014 7:00:13 pm Gavin Atkinson wrote: > > On Mon, 21 Jul 2014, Malcolm Douglas wrote: > > > Sorry, not sure if this is the right way to handle this, but I saw a > > > doc error. > > > > > > The pthread_cond_wait and pthread_cond_timedwait descriptions are > > > incorrect in man pthread. > > > > > > The description is: > > > Wait for a condition and lock the specified mutex. > > > > > > It should be: > > > Wait for a condition and unlock the specified mutex. > > > > The current description is actually correct, but not clear. How about: > > > > pthread_cond_timedwait() > > Unlock the specified mutex, wait no longer than the specified time for > > a condition, and then relock the mutex. > > > > pthread_cond_wait() > > Unlock the specified mutex, wait for a condition, and relock the mutex. > > > > Would that be better? > > I believe it is, yes. Thanks for the review, committed as r269871 and will merge in a week. Gavin