This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: Fwd: local equivalent for pthread_once() in glibc?
- From: Florian Weimer <fweimer at redhat dot com>
- To: Adhemerval Zanella <adhemerval dot zanella at linaro dot org>, libc-alpha at sourceware dot org
- Date: Sun, 25 Jun 2017 17:46:56 +0200
- Subject: Re: Fwd: local equivalent for pthread_once() in glibc?
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- Authentication-results: ext-mx07.extmail.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com
- Authentication-results: ext-mx07.extmail.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=fweimer at redhat dot com
- Dkim-filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 mx1.redhat.com 5EE11C049D5D
- Dmarc-filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mx1.redhat.com 5EE11C049D5D
- References: <9EBFE06E-AF1D-48E9-85AB-B74C048438B1@oracle.com> <F050C948-50BF-4305-84AC-9003F97D9F59@oracle.com> <be02ff5c-0313-29b2-e807-1a618559ec9c@redhat.com> <ff82b3b2-e282-9d88-775f-9fb46296787f@linaro.org> <d8588f17-b5b6-181d-2e97-7de012e89244@redhat.com> <6e7c1667-bc63-e999-9b53-b0ca221c90a8@linaro.org>
On 05/17/2017 04:51 PM, Adhemerval Zanella wrote:
> Right, but this is not seem the case for tunable where malloc_consolidate is
> called from ptmalloc_init (at least for main_arena). In any case, I still
> think that for adequate __malloc_initialized access using C11 atomic since
> its access is still done concurrently (that why I asked if using __libc_once
> would be simpler).
I don't understand. The concurrent access solely consists of reads. We
do not use atomics in that case.
Florian