Retiring __libc_rwlock?

[Adhemerval Zanella Netto]

On 27/02/26 13:36, Florian Weimer wrote:
> Should we retire __libc_rwlock_*?  It is equivalent to pthread_rwlock_*.
> I found it confusing that the hidden aliases for __pthread_rwlock_* do
> not work without including internal headers.  Instead we are expected to
> use <libc-lock.h> and __libc_rwlock_*.
> 
> Do we expect to have a smaller rwlock one day that lacks optional
> pthread features?


I would guess if the idea is to use it internally. But since we do not
have any usage I think we should just remove it.