Mailing-List: contact cygwin-developers-help AT sourceware DOT cygnus DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-developers-owner AT sources DOT redhat DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin-developers AT sources DOT redhat DOT com Message-ID: <01f101c0c85b$f308c030$0200a8c0@lifelesswks> From: "Robert Collins" To: References: <008a01c0c7eb$dd0d6b20$0200a8c0 AT lifelesswks> <20010418150427 DOT B3648 AT redhat DOT com> Subject: Re: process shared mutexs Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2001 09:04:39 +1000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 18 Apr 2001 22:57:11.0416 (UTC) FILETIME=[E6FA7780:01C0C85A] ----- Original Message ----- From: "Christopher Faylor" To: Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2001 5:04 AM Subject: Re: process shared mutexs > On Wed, Apr 18, 2001 at 07:42:10PM +1000, Robert Collins wrote: > >Chris, > > I'm working on process shared mutexs at the moment. I think the ABI > >will need to change to accomodate them (I'm not sure just yet). Can you > >hold of rolling 1.3 until I can confirm what needs to happen? > > Hmm. Is this the pthread ABI, I assume? Yes. I've now got pshared mutexs working without altering the ABI, but I'm in a quandary about interaction with condition variables for pshared mutex's. I suspect I will have to alter the pthread ABI for that if we want race-safe code. That or serialise the whole thing which I am trying to avoid. > I'll hold off for a couple of days. I'm about to check in a potentially > destabiliizing change to fd table inheritance that will probably need a couple > of days to settle down, anyway. Thanks Rob > So, I guess we're shooting for next weekend for 1.3.0. > > cgf >