[M3devel] Fwd: Re: Status of threads for RC4?

[Tony Hosking]

OpenBSD user-level threading should work one way (using getcontext/ 
setcontext./swapcontext/makecontext if available there) or another  
(emulating these using setjmp/longjmp and a documented approach to  
synthesizing thread stacks using sigaltstack).  Pthread threading is  
unlikely to work on OpenBSD until they fully support rthreads, but  
since OpenBSD pthreads are user-level we might as well use our own  
ThreadPosix implementation.  I don't know if the old (current RC  
branch) ThreadPosix will work on OpenBSD or whether it would be worth  
moving to the much improved version I implemented this weekend which  
is now on trunk.

On 26 Oct 2009, at 10:01, Jay K wrote:

>
> Windows threads should be ok for release..though..there is  
> definitely divergence in head.
>
> There was really just one main problem in Win32 threads, a copy/ 
> paste error I made a few months ago.
>
> It is fixed in release.
>
>
>
> OpenBSD we know the fix but not sure we'll get to it.
>
>
>
> There are still problems with mentor and/or Juno and/or Trestle, all  
> Windows specific.
>
> To some extent there are problems going back years, but things seem  
> to be much worse lately.
>
> I'm still investigating.
>
>
>
> - Jay
>
>
>> Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2009 13:49:24 +0100
>> From: wagner at elegosoft.com
>> To: jay.krell at cornell.edu
>> CC: m3devel at elegosoft.com
>> Subject: Re: [M3devel] Fwd: Re: Status of threads for RC4?
>>
>> Quoting Jay K <jay.krell at cornell.edu>:
>>
>>> WIndows threads are ok.
>> In the release branch, too?
>>
>>> OpenBSD are not currently=2C never have been.
>> Do we have a work-around or are we going to ignore this for the  
>> release?
>>
>>> Windows problems are probably in Trestle.
>>> Have been for many years apparently.
>> Do we wait for a fix here for RC4?
>>
>> I can see that you and Tony are quite busy, but there are no visible
>> changes for the release status.
>>
>> Olaf
>>
>>> =20
>>> - Jay
>>>
>>> ----------------------------------------
>>>> Date: Mon=2C 26 Oct 2009 10:35:08 +0100
>>>> From: wagner at elegosoft.com
>>>> To: hosking at cs.purdue.edu
>>>> CC: jay.krell at cornell.edu=3B m3devel at elegosoft.com
>>>> Subject: Re: [M3devel] Fwd: Re: Status of threads for RC4?
>>>>
>>>> Hi again=2C
>>>>
>>>> I'm still uncertain regarding the thread status. Hudson hasn't  
>>>> built
>>>> anything for about a month=2C so there have been no check-ins to  
>>>> the
>>>> release branch.
>>>>
>>>> (1) Has the OpenBSD problem been fixed or worked around?
>>>> If so=2C what are the relevant changes that should me merged from
>>>> trunk?
>>>>
>>>> The ChangeLog shows a lot of commits on head...
>>>>
>>>> (2) Is there still a problem in Windows threads?
>>>> Or are we just chasing a general access violation due to an
>>>> unknown reason?
>>>>
>>>> Again=2C is this ongoing or should some changes be merged for
>>>> the release?
>>>>
>>>> Olaf
>>>>
>>>> Quoting Tony Hosking :
>>>>
>>>>> On 21 Oct 2009=2C at 20:12=2C Jay K wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> ps: notice:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> resumed system calls will return an error value of EINTR
>>>>>
>>>>> Not a problem. We already cope with that in ThreadPThread.
>>>>>
>>>>>> We probably need to handle that in a bunch of places.
>>>>>> But some things like read/write will return just having done a
>>>>>> partial read/write?
>>>>>
>>>>> Huh? Should already be done?
>>>>>
>>>>>> Maybe something more cooperative would be easier?
>>>>>> Or even user threads??
>>>>>> I do have make/get/set/swapcontext synthesized from setjmp/ 
>>>>>> longjmp
>>>>>> on some OpenBSD platforms=2C like ppc/x86.
>>>>>
>>>>> These are available for OpenBSD already. Not sure why you  
>>>>> synthesized

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://m3lists.elegosoft.com/pipermail/m3devel/attachments/20091026/bbb45e90/attachment-0002.html>