[RFC] Fixing pthread_* namespace issues for thrd_* symbols

[Joseph Myers]

On Fri, 19 Jun 2015, Juan Manuel Torres Palma wrote:

> 2015-06-18 16:12 GMT+02:00 Joseph Myers <joseph@codesourcery.com>:
> 
> > Contents shouldn't be duplicated, but you could e.g. have a shared header
> > that defines macros such as __PTHREAD_COND_T_CONTENT, so cnd_t would be
> >
> > typedef union
> > {
> >   __PTHREAD_COND_T_CONTENT
> > } cnd_t;
> >
> > and pthread_cond_t similarly.
> 
> I have done that, but still have some code duplication (different
> mutex types for x86_64 and x86) but I think is acceptable because the
> code is easy to read. I could fix it splitting it in several macros,
> but I think it will look a bit more messy. However I will do it if
> needed, I'm still learning :)

This is looking closer to what I'd expect if we do go with the same layout 
of C11 and POSIX threads types (subject of course to updating all 
architectures similarly).  Now, I don't see any reason for 
bits/threadstypes.h to be architecture-specific.  Furthermore, maybe the 
parts of bits/pthreadtypes.h that now just use the *_CONTENT macros 
shouldn't be architecture-specific either (that is, they should be in a 
new bits/ header with only one version of that header in the tree).

-- 
Joseph S. Myers
joseph@codesourcery.com