[lkml]   [2002]   [Nov]   [17]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [patch] threading fix, tid-2.5.47-A3

On Sun, 17 Nov 2002, Ulrich Drepper wrote:
> It doesn't do this. Ingo's description simply wasn't right.
> The syscall is used in one place and this is when the thread library
> gets initialized. I never gets used unconditionally and in situations
> where the process is not prepared.

Ok, good. That means that "sys_set_userpid()" is fine with me.

That still leaves the other part of the patch. I do not think that SETTID
and CLEARTID should be mixed together. There are perfectly valid reasons
why a parent wants SETTID even when it _doesn't_ want CLEARTID.

In fact, SETTID is clearly useful even without threads, and exactly for
the case that Ingo apparently broke with his patch: the parent wants to
atomically save the TID of the child in the _parents_ address space (so
that a immediate SIGCHLD won't be racy with saving off the pid by the

So Ingo, please send me just the sys_set_userpid() parts, and revert your
broken code that made SETTID do bad things and only work for threads.

There's no reason to make SETTID/CLEARTID be one flag, since they are
clearly different things, and NPTL can just always set both bits if that
is the behaviour glibc wants (and I agree with that behaviour, of course.
I just disagree with not allowing others to do different things).


To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:31    [W:0.079 / U:0.056 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site