X-Recipient:	archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com
X-SWARE-Spam-Status:	No, hits=-1.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD
X-Spam-Check-By:	sourceware.org
Message-ID:	<4C7D0F3F.4050700@sidefx.com>
Date:	Tue, 31 Aug 2010 10:18:39 -0400
From:	Edward Lam <edward AT sidefx DOT com>
User-Agent:	Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.2; WOW64; rv:2.0b5pre) Gecko/20100820 Shredder/3.2a1pre
MIME-Version:	1.0
To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject:	Re: Cygwin slow on x64 systems
References:	<4C7CA209 DOT 60603 AT onevision DOT de> <20100831140842 DOT GA11833 AT ednor DOT casa DOT cgf DOT cx>
In-Reply-To:	<20100831140842.GA11833@ednor.casa.cgf.cx>
X-IsSubscribed:	yes
Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Id:	<cygwin.cygwin.com>
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender:	cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com

On 8/31/2010 10:08 AM, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>
> Here's what I'm saying:  It makes absolutely no sense that moving the
> call would have any effect.  The code is the way it is for a reason
> so we're not going to just revert the change.

I don't think anyone is asking to revert the change.

In any case, is it absolutely necessary for us to call 
wait_for_sigthread() before we do the other initialization in 
dll_crt0_1() ? ie. can we move it further down? Or perhaps we can 
reorder the initialization code somewhat such that we can do more work 
before calling wait_for_sigthread()?

Regards,
-Edward

--
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple

- Raw text -