Re: FreeBSD/i386 thread test

Manfred Spraul wrote:
> Jeroen Ruigrok/asmodai wrote:
> 
> >-On [20030908 23:52], Peter Eisentraut (peter_e@gmx.net) wrote:
> >  
> >
> >>Why would FreeBSD have a "library of thread-safe libc functions" (libc_r)
> >>if the functions weren't thread-safe?  I think the test is faulty.
> >>    
> >>
> A thread-safe library has a per-thread errno value (i.e. errno is a 
> #define to a function call), thread-safe io buffers for stdio, etc. Some 
> of these changes cause a noticable overhead, thus a seperate library for 
> those users who want to avoid that overhead.
> 
> Reentrancy is independant from _r: If you look at the prototype of 
> gethostbyname(), it's just not possible to make that thread safe with 
> reasonable effort - the C library would have to keep one buffer per 
> thread around.

See the top of src/port/thread.c --- that's exactly what is does (keep
one buffer per thread around).
*  Threading sometimes requires specially-named versions of functions*  that return data in static buffers, like
strerror_r()instead of*  strerror().  Other operating systems use pthread_setspecific()*  and pthread_getspecific()
internallyto allow standard library*  functions to return static data to threaded applications.
 

--  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610)
359-1001+  If your life is a hard drive,     |  13 Roberts Road +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Newtown Square,
Pennsylvania19073