On Iau, 2006-04-13 at 15:06 -0700, Dan Bonachea wrote:
> Unless I'm missing something, that doesn't leave much ambiguity regarding
> what's required for POSIX compliance on this issue (although I'm not sure
> POSIX compliance is the right metric).
Interesting. That pretty much conflicts with what write(2) itself is
defined as in the same specification, and means that the locking is
specific to posix thread groups not to processes. Well we've always
known that pthreads was a brain dead screw-up of a specification so I
guess that should be no suprise.
If the locking is thread group specific it may actually be best to
handle that one in glibc with a futex lock, as only glibc really knows
what is a posix pthread app, and it would avoid the idiocy escaping into
normal applications (which are 95+% of cases)
What does Ulrich think ?
Alan
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
