This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: [MTASCsft PATCH 01/??] MT-, AS- and AC-Safety docs
- From: "Carlos O'Donell" <carlos at redhat dot com>
- To: Alexandre Oliva <aoliva at redhat dot com>
- Cc: codonell at redhat dot com, libc-alpha at sourceware dot org
- Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2014 00:52:52 -0500
- Subject: Re: [MTASCsft PATCH 01/??] MT-, AS- and AC-Safety docs
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <ortxelb5zd dot fsf at livre dot home> <or4n4uoncj dot fsf at livre dot home> <52E6F750 dot 2050008 at redhat dot com> <ora9egel16 dot fsf at livre dot home> <52E88B68 dot 2040305 at redhat dot com> <ora9efcpft dot fsf at livre dot home>
On 01/29/2014 12:44 AM, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> On Jan 29, 2014, "Carlos O'Donell" <carlos@redhat.com> wrote:
>
>> Just like signal handlers, cancellation cleanup routines must
>> configure the floating point environment they require. The routines
>> cannot assume a floating point environment, particularly when
>> asynchronous cancellation is enabled. If the configuration of a
>> the floating point environment cannot be performed atomically then it
>> is also possible that the environment encountered is internally
>> inconsistent.
>
> I put this in, with s/a\nthe/the/.
Thanks. Looks good.
>> IMO the discussion two FPU systems is beyond the scope of this text.
>
>>> +the accesses are well defined. The notion that users are expected to
>>> +safeguard against data races any objects of their choice that the
>>> +library accesses on their behalf prevails.
>
>> This last sentence remains awkward.
>
>> Suggest rewording as follows:
>
>> The notion prevails that users are expected to safeguard against data
>> races any objects that the library accesses on their behalf.
>
> I like that, except for dropping the âof their choiceâ; that would turn
> all cases of @mtasurace into @mtsrace.
You're right; it does imply that when read out of context.
> I'm taking that with s/objects/user-supplied objects/, if you don't
> mind.
That's also fine.
> Ok to install with these two changes?
Yes.
Cheers,
Carlos.