From owner-freebsd-threads@FreeBSD.ORG  Tue Dec 20 10:09:25 2011
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-threads@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: threads@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6E3971065672;
	Tue, 20 Dec 2011 10:09:25 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from phk@phk.freebsd.dk)
Received: from phk.freebsd.dk (phk.freebsd.dk [130.225.244.222])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2D02B8FC19;
	Tue, 20 Dec 2011 10:09:24 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from critter.freebsd.dk (critter.freebsd.dk [192.168.61.3])
	by phk.freebsd.dk (Postfix) with ESMTP id 08D2A5DB3;
	Tue, 20 Dec 2011 10:09:23 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from critter.freebsd.dk (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by critter.freebsd.dk (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id pBKA9N3A003066;
	Tue, 20 Dec 2011 10:09:23 GMT (envelope-from phk@phk.freebsd.dk)
To: "Niall Douglas" <s_sourceforge@nedprod.com>
From: "Poul-Henning Kamp" <phk@phk.freebsd.dk>
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 20 Dec 2011 09:48:12 GMT."
	<4EF059DC.26433.B55D8036@s_sourceforge.nedprod.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2011 10:09:23 +0000
Message-ID: <3065.1324375763@critter.freebsd.dk>
Cc: threads@freebsd.org, arch@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: [Patch] C1X threading support
X-BeenThere: freebsd-threads@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Threading on FreeBSD <freebsd-threads.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-threads>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-threads-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-threads>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-threads@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-threads-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-threads>,
	<mailto:freebsd-threads-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2011 10:09:25 -0000

In message <4EF059DC.26433.B55D8036@s_sourceforge.nedprod.com>, "Niall Douglas"
 writes:
>On 19 Dec 2011 at 17:31, Daniel Eischen wrote:
>
>> > Obviously, had we known that from the beginning, things would have
>> > been done differently. However, there was - in hindsight - a lack of
>> > realisation just how expensive any significant changes would appear
>> > to vendors.
>> 
>> And why on earth would the thought of having a threading API
>> significantly different from the POSIX API even be on the
>> table?  It boggles the mind.
>
>1. Because [...]

Nice and fine.

But can you explain, why the job is done so half-assedly ?


Why are fundamentally and necessary programming tools, such as a
"assert this mutex is held" missing ?

Why are timescale-issues not dealt with ?

For instance mtx_timedlock() operates only on the UTC scale.  Where
is the option to wait on an "elapsed time" timescale to not be hosed
by ntpd(8) or root's setting the clock backwards during system
startup ?

Where did the ability to control a threads stacksize or other
attributes go in thrd_create() ?


-- 
Poul-Henning Kamp       | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
phk@FreeBSD.ORG         | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer       | BSD since 4.3-tahoe    
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.