Denis Oliver Kropp wrote:
> Claudio Ciccani schrieb:
> 
>> Denis Oliver Kropp wrote:
>>
>>> Claudio Ciccani schrieb:
>>>
>>>> Denis Oliver Kropp wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> But pthread_cancel() also terminates the thread at mutex_lock for
>>>>> example which would be bad if a lock is already taken. I'd prefer
>>>>> having well chosen voluntary exit points.
>>>>>
>>>> That can be avoided by using a similar procedure:
>>>>
>>>> pthread_setcancelstate(PTHREAD_CANEL_DISABLE)
>>>> //
>>>> // safe calls ...
>>>> //
>>>> pthread_setcancelstate(PTHREAD_CANCEL_ENABLE)
>>>> // process pending cancelations
>>>> pthread_testcancel()
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> According to me, the problems you are encountering suggest that
>>>> pthread_cancel() should not be removed.
>>>
>>> The DI guys prefer to not add a needed extra library (on AMD64), but
>>> replace those calls.
>>>
>>
>> But an ordinary system have that library installed!
>> We could provide a patch for Debian, but we should not change DirectFB
>> main code accoring to me.
> 
> 
> That's what I thought :)
> 
> But your suggestions to guard the code outside the blocking read()
> by disabling (or better defering) cancelation are good.

IIUC pthread_cancel() is revealing difficult to be replaced: should we 
proceed adding libgcc1 to d-i, hence leaving you DFB guys all the time 
you needed to implement an appropriate replacement for that call?

cheers

Attilio

_______________________________________________
directfb-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.directfb.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/directfb-dev

Reply via email to