This is the mail archive of the libc-alpha@sources.redhat.com 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: Proposal for a userspace "architecture portability" library

From: "Kevin P. Fleming" <kpfleming at starnetworks dot us>
To: Paul Mackerras <paulus at samba dot org>
Cc: Robert Love <rml at novell dot com>, Linus Torvalds <torvalds at osdl dot org>, David Woodhouse <dwmw2 at infradead dot org>,David Howells <dhowells at redhat dot com>, linux-kernel at vger dot kernel dot org, libc-alpha at sources dot redhat dot com
Date: Sat, 04 Dec 2004 19:10:03 -0700
Subject: Re: Proposal for a userspace "architecture portability" library
Organization: Star Networks, LLC
References: <16818.23575.549824.733470@cargo.ozlabs.ibm.com> <1102208924.6052.94.camel@localhost> <16818.26777.209451.685576@cargo.ozlabs.ibm.com>

Paul Mackerras wrote:

No, for semaphores and rwsems I was going to use futexes.  Or maybe we
don't need the kernel's semaphores, rwsems and spinlocks in userspace
at all.  I'm open to suggestions.

I think that _all_ of these items can find use in userspace, if they are usable with glibc's threading implementation and the other userspace issues that would be involved.

I for one would love to be able to use lightweight rwsems and spinlocks in an application I'm working on, but it's entirely userspace and it would be impossible for _me_ to pick out this code from the kernel tree and make it work on any architecture that I don't have here (which is all of them except x86 <G>).

References:
- Proposal for a userspace "architecture portability" library
  - From: Paul Mackerras
- Re: Proposal for a userspace "architecture portability" library
  - From: Paul Mackerras

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