Date: Sat, 31 May 2008 07:27:26 +0800 From: David Xu <davidxu@freebsd.org> To: Daniel Eischen <deischen@freebsd.org> Cc: freebsd-threads@freebsd.org Subject: Re: pthread_cleanup_push as a macro Message-ID: <48408D5E.2010609@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.4.64.0805301905020.20343@sea.ntplx.net> References: <483FA1C0.2010506@freebsd.org> <200805301748.29689.jhb@freebsd.org> <Pine.GSO.4.64.0805301905020.20343@sea.ntplx.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Daniel Eischen wrote: > On Fri, 30 May 2008, John Baldwin wrote: > >> On Friday 30 May 2008 02:42:08 am David Xu wrote: >>> I would like to make pthread_cleanup_push and pthread_cleanup_pop as a >>> pair of macros, the current implementation has to malloc() and free() a >>> pthread_cleanup memory block everytime, this is slow, the new one >>> simply uses stack space, note that other OSes have already done it in >>> this way. The patch keeps old functions and should not have binary >>> compatible problem. >>> >>> http://people.freebsd.org/~davidxu/patch/pthread_cleanup_push.patch >> >> Please do! > > I agree - Solaris does this too. I am unsure why you really need > a strong_reference - I would prefer something that doesn't require > it. > This becauses original _pthread_cleanup_push and _pthread_cleanup_pop are functions but not weak aliases, it is to keep compatibility.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?48408D5E.2010609>