Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Fri, 07 Dec 2001 18:33:16 +0000 | From | Padraig Brady <> | Subject | Re: horrible disk thorughput on itanium |
| |
Andi Kleen wrote:
>>You can be thread-safe without sucking dead baby donkeys through a straw. >>I already mentioned two possible ways to fix it so that you have locking >>when you need to, and no locking when you don't. >> > > Your proposals sound rather dangerous. They would silently break recompiled > threaded programs that need the locking and don't use -D__REENTRANT (most > people do not seem to use it).
I would worry about threaded progs that don't -D_REENTRANT as they are broken.
> I doubt the possible pain from that is > worth it for speeding up an basically obsolete interface like putc. > > i.e. if someone wants speed they definitely shouldn't use putc()
It's not just putc, it's all of stdio.
Padraig.
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|  |