[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]
List: freedesktop-xcb
Subject: Re: [Xcb] pthread stubs in libX11 vs. libxcb
From: Josh Triplett <josh () joshtriplett ! org>
Date: 2022-09-30 14:27:32
Message-ID: Yzb81O5JaXwo3+fG () localhost
[Download RAW message or body]
On Thu, Sep 29, 2022 at 05:45:28PM +0200, Uli Schlachter wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Am 29.09.22 um 06:27 schrieb Keith Packard:
> > Alan Coopersmith <alan.coopersmith@oracle.com> writes:
> >
> > > Does anyone disagree?
> >
> > Yeah, synchronizing with xcb seems 'obviously right. The only question
> > I've got is that in 2022, should xcb ever use stubs for the thread functions?
>
> No, it shouldn't. That's why since 2017, pthread-stub just links against
> pthread. It only does not do that if libc already includes the necessary
> stubs. See https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/xorg/lib/pthread-stubs/-/commit/8340ebd656c7e1a5b6d31170c1f3c87df043e793
>
At this point, I wonder if we should even have libpthread-stubs at all
(other than for backwards compatibility), versus just *unconditionally*
linking libxcb against whatever library is necessary to obtain pthreads
symbols.
In 2022, it *seems* like single-threaded applications are really
unlikely to be bottlenecked on X protocol (rather than numerous other
things through which more data will flow) to the degree that omitting
locking will make the difference between them being functional and not;
that's not worth the safety and correctness issues that attempting to do
so introduces.
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]
Configure |
About |
News |
Add a list |
Sponsored by KoreLogic