This is the mail archive of the libc-hacker@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the glibc project.
Note that libc-hacker is a closed list. You may look at the archives of this list, but subscription and posting are not open.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
Roland McGrath <roland@frob.com> writes: > It certainly works fine for linuxthreads, and I didn't mean to suggest > otherwise. Seeing the patch I finally understand what you mean. The POSIX way of handling recursive mutexes is to have different initializers and that's it. Therefore we use the normal lock/unlock functions throughout the code. Yes, _recursive macros were there but they didn't seem necessary. It is of course perfectly well possible that some recursive lock implementations use a different set of functions from the normal mutex. Apparently cthreads does this. I never looked at that implementation so I couldn't know. Having said this the patch looks fine. Go ahead, check it in if you have successfully compiled a Linux version. If not I'll look at it tomorrow. -- ---------------. ,-. 1325 Chesapeake Terrace Ulrich Drepper \ ,-------------------' \ Sunnyvale, CA 94089 USA Red Hat `--' drepper at redhat.com `------------------------
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |