tech-userlevel archive

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]

Re: C11 threads patch proposal

I wrote this almost 3 years ago and I don't remember what was the
original rationale, probably trying to be as independent from
<pthread*.h> as possible, but in the end I've included <pthread.h> in
<threads.h> in order to reuse regular symbols such as PTHREAD_ONCE_INIT.

Thank you for pointing this. I will switch it to pthread_key_t (== int

Another nit that I've noted after importing the patch into src/ is that
I used __dead instead of _Noreturn. 3 years ago !C11 compilers were
still in consideration, but it's not a concernt anymore. C11 threads
support library expects compiler support for TLS anyway.

I will switch this __dead to _Noreturn to be more aligned with the

On 24.04.2019 18:43, enh wrote:
> any reason you're using `int` rather than `pthread_key_t` for `tss_t`?
> (given that the other C11 types are just the pthread types.) for
> Android, i'm going with all the types being the same, and wondered if
> i missed something here?
> On Thu, Apr 18, 2019 at 6:30 PM Kamil Rytarowski <> wrote:
>> I wrote a complete C11 threading support for NetBSD.
>> The original implementation was written in 2016 and interrupted due to
>> some issues in libpthread(3). These bugs are now gone.
>> In the context of final implementation of C11 threads in GLIBC and the
>> process of making it a part of POSIX, I've picked this work, cleaned up
>> and added ATF tests.
>> As noted by Joerg, an alternative way to implement C11 threads is to put
>> it in libpthread(3) (instead of libc). This is a good idea as we can
>> stop relying on libc stubs and stop adding more stubs that are still
>> missing in libc.
>> The patch includes man pages.
>> I intend to get it merged before the -9 branch.
>> I'm open for comments.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Home | Main Index | Thread Index | Old Index