This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
Documenting MT-safe vs. MT-unsafe.
- From: "Carlos O'Donell" <carlos at redhat dot com>
- To: Michael Kerrisk <mtk dot manpages at gmail dot com>, Alexandre Oliva <aoliva at redhat dot com>, Peng Haitao <penght at cn dot fujitsu dot com>, GNU C Library <libc-alpha at sourceware dot org>, linux-man at vger dot kernel dot org
- Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2013 21:32:25 -0400
- Subject: Documenting MT-safe vs. MT-unsafe.
Peng,
The work that you are doing documenting multithreading
safety in the linux kernel man pages is excellent, and
very useful. Thank you for working on this.
Michael, Peng,
At present I am a little worried that glibc is going
to document what we want to be true e.g. MT-unsafe,
but that the linux kernel man pages project is going
to document what is actually implemented e.g. MT-safe.
This may lead users to believe functions are safe
when they are not guaranteed to be so.
The other problem is that the two documents might
diverge and this information is very important.
What can we do to keep the two documents in sync?
When Alex completes his project we'll have MT-safety
data (with a series of exceptions) for almost all
of the glibc functions. Could we use that data to
drive the generation of the attributes in the
linux kernel man pages?
Comments?
Cheers,
Carlos.