[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Upstreaming the glibc Hurd port

From: Samuel Thibault
Subject: Re: Upstreaming the glibc Hurd port
Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2018 20:53:42 +0200
User-agent: NeoMutt/20170113 (1.7.2)

Zack Weinberg, le mer. 18 avril 2018 14:40:29 -0400, a ecrit:
> On Wed, Apr 18, 2018 at 10:03 AM, Samuel Thibault
> <address@hidden> wrote:
> >>
> >> I have a concern: the types 'struct sched_param' and 'struct
> >> __sched_param' are not compatible, even if their members are identical
> >> (6.2.7p1 explicitly requires the tags to be the same for
> >> compatibility).
> >
> > Ah, probably that's why bits/sched.h used to define both sched_param and
> > __sched_param with the __sched_priority field, and #define
> > sched_priority to __sched_priority.  I can do that, it's fine.
> This is actually worse than having struct sched_param defined by
> sys/types.h, because sched.h is now defining *macro* names that it's
> not supposed to.  It's far more likely that a program will try to
> define a variable named 'sched_priority' than that it will try to
> define its own 'struct sched_param'.

Sure. glibc just has been #defining sched_priority for a very long time
already :)

> Can I ask whether you want to keep exposing the internals of pthread_*
> types to applications?  If there's a plan to stop doing that - even a
> "yeah but it's hard and we have so many other things to do first"
> intention - then I would recommend leaving sched_param alone for now
> and just XFAILing the conformance test.

That's it indeed.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]