From owner-freebsd-hackers  Wed Dec  2 12:59:22 1998
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id MAA03984
          for freebsd-hackers-outgoing; Wed, 2 Dec 1998 12:59:22 -0800 (PST)
          (envelope-from owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG)
Received: from pcnet1.pcnet.com (pcnet1.pcnet.com [204.213.232.3])
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id MAA03979
          for <freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG>; Wed, 2 Dec 1998 12:59:18 -0800 (PST)
          (envelope-from eischen@vigrid.com)
Received: (from eischen@localhost)
	by pcnet1.pcnet.com (8.8.7/PCNet) id PAA02860;
	Wed, 2 Dec 1998 15:58:53 -0500 (EST)
Date: Wed, 2 Dec 1998 15:58:53 -0500 (EST)
From: Daniel Eischen <eischen@vigrid.com>
Message-Id: <199812022058.PAA02860@pcnet1.pcnet.com>
To: jb@cimlogic.com.au, lists@tar.com
Subject: Re: pthread_cancel() function...
Cc: eischen@vigrid.com, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG

> I don't think it is sufficient to just add what you call "wrappers".
> AFAIK, the thread cancellation is supposed to occur at any time while
> the thread is in one of the specified functions, not just at the beginning
> or at the end. This means that code is required to check the thread
> state and do things conditionally on that.

Yech!  You're talking only about cancellable libc routines, though,
right (system calls have no concept of userland thread states)?

Dan Eischen
eischen@vigrid.com

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message