From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Aug 28 17:37:09 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CE009B0F; Thu, 28 Aug 2014 17:37:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: from troutmask.apl.washington.edu (troutmask.apl.washington.edu [128.95.76.21]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "troutmask.apl.washington.edu", Issuer "troutmask.apl.washington.edu" (not verified)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 91047176D; Thu, 28 Aug 2014 17:37:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: from troutmask.apl.washington.edu (localhost.apl.washington.edu [127.0.0.1]) by troutmask.apl.washington.edu (8.14.9/8.14.9) with ESMTP id s7SHIxeR081873 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 28 Aug 2014 10:18:59 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu) Received: (from sgk@localhost) by troutmask.apl.washington.edu (8.14.9/8.14.9/Submit) id s7SHIxfo081872; Thu, 28 Aug 2014 10:18:59 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from sgk) Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2014 10:18:59 -0700 From: Steve Kargl To: Ed Schouten Subject: Re: Lock annotations: enable them for libpthread, libstdthreads Message-ID: <20140828171859.GA81757@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Cc: freebsd-toolchain@freebsd.org, freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2014 17:37:09 -0000 On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 07:02:55PM +0200, Ed Schouten wrote: > > small number of patches to build with this flag, I am also going to > add -Wthread-safety to WARNS=6, to make sure it won't regress. I'm > also planning on MFC'ing at least the changes to , so it > is at least possible to write portable code. What it is the performance penalty (time and memory)? That is, buildworld already takes a looooonnnnng time on my system because of clang. -- Steve