Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-developers-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-developers-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin-developers/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-developers-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender:	cygwin-developers-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com
Date:	Mon, 30 Sep 2002 17:03:09 -0400
From:	Christopher Faylor <cgf AT redhat DOT com>
To:	cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com
Subject:	Re: [PATCH] change to thread.cc -- need feedback
Message-ID:	<20020930210309.GD4372@redhat.com>
Reply-To:	cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To:	cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com
References:	<20020930151227 DOT GA10898 AT redhat DOT com> <1033419006 DOT 30057 DOT 210 DOT camel AT lifelesswks>
Mime-Version:	1.0
In-Reply-To:	<1033419006.30057.210.camel@lifelesswks>
User-Agent:	Mutt/1.4i

On Tue, Oct 01, 2002 at 06:50:06AM +1000, Robert Collins wrote:
>On Tue, 2002-10-01 at 01:12, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>> I've changed the static declarations in thread.cc to use
>> NO_COPY and things seem to be working better in my build.
>
>I've got some confusion going on I think.
>
>Whats the call order during fork of dll_crt0_1, and
>MTinterface::fixup_after_fork ()? 

dll_crt0_1 calls fork.

It seemed like it was possible that the static mutex value would be
overwritten when fork is called.  That's not handled in
MTinterface::fixup_after_fork, is it?

cgf

- Raw text -