Re: C11 threads patch proposal

[enh <enh%google.com@localhost>]

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 <n54%gmx.com@localhost> 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.
>
> http://netbsd.org/~kamil/patch-00104-c11threads-in-pthread.3.txt
>
> I intend to get it merged before the -9 branch.
>
> I'm open for comments.
>