This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: glibc 2.28 status.
- From: Carlos O'Donell <carlos at redhat dot com>
- To: Adhemerval Zanella <adhemerval dot zanella at linaro dot org>, GNU C Library <libc-alpha at sourceware dot org>, "H.J. Lu" <hjl dot tools at gmail dot com>, Florian Weimer <fweimer at redhat dot com>, "Joseph S. Myers" <joseph at codesourcery dot com>
- Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2018 17:52:13 -0400
- Subject: Re: glibc 2.28 status.
- References: <5fee6dec-3e32-7e34-f2e8-c8e9a64134b2@redhat.com> <fb53a597-5050-3f73-03c4-bb317a139078@linaro.org>
On 07/21/2018 09:39 AM, Adhemerval Zanella wrote:
>
>
> On 20/07/2018 22:42, Carlos O'Donell wrote:
>> Adhemerval,
>>
>> What is the status of ISO C Threads support?
>>
>
> All patches were reviewed except one which handles the condition
> variable [1] (I am referencing the branch one instead of v8 from
> patchset I sent earlier because I fixed some cosmetic nits, such
> as bugzilla reference and some internal wording). The patch
> review should be straightforward, the c threads is just wrappers
> for POSIX counterpart (there is not internal adjustments required
> as for mtx_* or thrd_*).
>
> I can resend the whole set as v9 if you prefer.
I don't think you need to post the entire set as v9.
I would repost the cond var patch as v9 with the changes you've made
and ping for review.
This is where 'Signed-off-from' is really useful. Right now I don't
know if Florian and Joseph think this implementation is ready.
Florian,
Could you confirm you think the C threads implementation is ready?
Joseph,
Likewise. Have you reviewed the content of the patches and agree
the implementation is ready?
Cheers,
Carlos.