Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 23 Sep 2010 23:48:40 -0400
From:      Jung-uk Kim <jkim@FreeBSD.org>
To:        Daniel Eischen <deischen@freebsd.org>
Cc:        freebsd-threads@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: threads/150889: PTHREAD_MUTEX_INITIALIZER +	pthread_mutex_destroy () == EINVAL
Message-ID:  <201009232348.45201.jkim@FreeBSD.org>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.4.64.1009231839080.18138@sea.ntplx.net>
References:  <201009232220.o8NMK3fX011639@freefall.freebsd.org> <Pine.GSO.4.64.1009231839080.18138@sea.ntplx.net>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thursday 23 September 2010 06:44 pm, Daniel Eischen wrote:
> You shouldn't have to call pthread_mutex_init() on a mutex
> initialized with PTHREAD_MUTEX_INITIALIZER.  Our implementation
> should auto initialize the mutex when it is first used; if it
> doesn't, I think that is a bug.

Ah, I see.  I verified that libthr does it correctly.  However, that's 
a hack and it is far from real static allocation although it should 
work pretty well in reality, IMHO.  More over, it will have a 
side-effect, i.e., any destroyed mutex may be resurrected if it is 
used again.  POSIX seems to say it should return EINVAL when it 
happens. :-(

> You _do have_ to lock the mutex before calling a condition
> wait, however.  This is a POSIX requirement.

Yes, understood.

Thanks,

Jung-uk Kim



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?201009232348.45201.jkim>