This is the mail archive of the libc-alpha@sourceware.org mailing list for the glibc project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: Async-signal-safe access to __thread variables from dlopen()ed libraries?


On 09/20/2013 01:56 PM, Ian Lance Taylor wrote:
>> * Work with the community to ensure consensus around an
>>   acceptable solution.
> 
> To be clear, Google already has a patch, as Paul mentioned in the
> message that restarted this thread.  And frankly I thought this idea
> was a slam dunk if it could be implemented, and I'm surprised to see
> so much resistance.  At this point I have to say that the community
> does not seem interested, so my inclination would be to skip it and
> just do something that works internally.  That is disappointing but it
> is quite possible that I am missing something about this issue.

I'm disappointed that after a couple of email exchanges you appear to
be about to call it quits.

As far as I can tell we're having a good discussion around some points
that I raised.

What you're missing is that not everyone agrees with you, and that
glibc is a consensus driven community. We don't want one Overlord that
accepts patches from Google and checks them in as they see fit.

We talk about things. We hash it out. We put in a good solution.

You sir appear to be threatening to leave because we didn't agree
outright. It's true the unspoken expectations lead to frustration.

I've started a wiki page and I'll summarize people's comments there:
https://sourceware.org/glibc/wiki/TLSandSignals

All I can say is that if you stick around we'll see it through to
some kind of solution.

Cheers,
Carlos.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]