[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Mutexes
From: |
John Darrington |
Subject: |
Re: Mutexes |
Date: |
Mon, 20 Apr 2009 12:30:05 +0800 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) |
On Sun, Apr 19, 2009 at 09:05:07PM -0700, Ben Pfaff wrote:
John Darrington <address@hidden> writes:
> On Sun, Apr 19, 2009 at 08:26:57PM -0700, Ben Pfaff wrote:
> John Darrington <address@hidden> writes:
>
> > Any objections if I check in some thread safety changes to the
lower
> > levels, such as the attached patch ?
> >
> > I don't think there's going to be a multi-threaded pspp for
production
> > use any time soon, but I've been doing some experiments in order
to
> > find out what some of the issues are.
>
> Could we put this into a separate branch? I'm nervous about
> adding unneeded dependencies.
>
> It doesn't need any additional dependencies, unless you count an extra
> gnulib module as a dependency.
Won't the gnulib module will cause our binaries to link against
new libraries, e.g. libpthread on Linux?
At any rate, this will change some very cheap operations, such as
incrementing a value, into relatively expensive ones.
I thought they were supposed to do nothing if a thread library wasn't
specified.
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
- Mutexes, John Darrington, 2009/04/19