Re: futex for Mach?

On Mon, Feb 17, 2003 at 09:25:38PM -0500, Roland McGrath wrote:
> > In other words:  We are adding a new requirement to the underlying kernel,
> > instead working with the minimal set of primitives.
> 
> No, this is an implementation detail of one of the existing requirements,
> which is "libpthread implementation appropriate for the underlying kernel".

Mmh, ok.  That is correct, it is limited to pthread and not exposed beyond
that.

> The only potentially wasted effort is that of adding futex to Mach and
> working on NPTL.  The user-level stuff for using new Mach futex interfaces
> per se will be small, and the other stuff that needs to be done with NPTL
> and glibc is the tight integration with glibc and revamp of some hurdish
> glibc innards that we need eventually to do one way or the other.
> 
> As to the kernel work, I think I can do that pretty quickly especially if
> we are not worried to begin with about it being especially fast.

Ok, that sounds good to me.

Thanks,
Marcus

-- 
`Rhubarb is no Egyptian god.' GNU      http://www.gnu.org    [email protected]
Marcus Brinkmann              The Hurd http://www.gnu.org/software/hurd/
[email protected]
http://www.marcus-brinkmann.de/