From owner-freebsd-threads@FreeBSD.ORG  Sun Dec 18 13:27:44 2011
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-threads@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: threads@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5C109106574A;
	Sun, 18 Dec 2011 13:27:44 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jilles@stack.nl)
Received: from mx1.stack.nl (relay02.stack.nl [IPv6:2001:610:1108:5010::104])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ECF1C8FC17;
	Sun, 18 Dec 2011 13:27:43 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from snail.stack.nl (snail.stack.nl [IPv6:2001:610:1108:5010::131])
	by mx1.stack.nl (Postfix) with ESMTP id E2B0A3592DF;
	Sun, 18 Dec 2011 14:27:42 +0100 (CET)
Received: by snail.stack.nl (Postfix, from userid 1677)
	id B56AB28468; Sun, 18 Dec 2011 14:27:42 +0100 (CET)
Date: Sun, 18 Dec 2011 14:27:42 +0100
From: Jilles Tjoelker <jilles@stack.nl>
To: Kostik Belousov <kostikbel@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20111218132742.GA52983@stack.nl>
References: <20111216214913.GA1771@hoeg.nl>
	<20111216220914.GW50300@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua>
	<20111216221959.GB1771@hoeg.nl>
	<20111216223126.GX50300@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20111216223126.GX50300@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Cc: arch@freebsd.org, Ed Schouten <ed@80386.nl>, threads@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: [Patch] C1X threading support
X-BeenThere: freebsd-threads@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Threading on FreeBSD <freebsd-threads.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-threads>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-threads-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-threads>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-threads@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-threads-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-threads>,
	<mailto:freebsd-threads-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 18 Dec 2011 13:27:44 -0000

On Sat, Dec 17, 2011 at 12:31:26AM +0200, Kostik Belousov wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 11:19:59PM +0100, Ed Schouten wrote:
> > * Kostik Belousov <kostikbel@gmail.com>, 20111216 23:09:
> > > If application that does not use the new interface supposed to be
> > > able to implement function with new names, then the not-underscored
> > > symbols must be weak.

> > For example when an application wants to implement its own functions
> > that are named thrd_*(), for example?
> Yes. The realistic example is the code written to C99/SUSv4 conformance
> that happens to define thrd_<something>.

> It might be that easiest solution is to put the functions into
> separate library, besides defining them weak.

Another idea is to implement the functions as static inline (with the
possible exception of thrd_create() and perhaps some more). This
pollutes the namespace of C1x programs with pthread_* though.

> > > Do you have reference to the draft ?

> > Yes, sure:

> > 	http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n1570.pdf
> BTW, it looks not very useful to add a bunch of threading functions
> without at least trying to specify the memory model.

I see a discussion of the memory model in 5.1.2.4 Multi-threaded
executions and data races.

-- 
Jilles Tjoelker