Mailing-List: contact cygwin-developers-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-developers-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin-developers/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-developers-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-developers-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com
Date: Wed, 2 Oct 2002 00:41:31 -0400
From: Christopher Faylor <cgf AT redhat DOT com>
To: cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Thread problems fixed - on XP at least
Message-ID: <20021002044131.GA31227@redhat.com>
Reply-To: cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin-developers AT cygwin DOT com
References: <20020930151227 DOT GA10898 AT redhat DOT com> <1033419006 DOT 30057 DOT 210 DOT camel AT lifelesswks> <20020930210309 DOT GD4372 AT redhat DOT com> <1033422095 DOT 11275 DOT 216 DOT camel AT lifelesswks>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1033422095.11275.216.camel@lifelesswks>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i

On Tue, Oct 01, 2002 at 07:41:34AM +1000, Robert Collins wrote:
>On Tue, 2002-10-01 at 07:03, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>> On Tue, Oct 01, 2002 at 06:50:06AM +1000, Robert Collins wrote:
>> >On Tue, 2002-10-01 at 01:12, Christopher Faylor wrote:
>> >> I've changed the static declarations in thread.cc to use
>> >> NO_COPY and things seem to be working better in my build.
>> >
>> >I've got some confusion going on I think.
>> >
>> >Whats the call order during fork of dll_crt0_1, and
>> >MTinterface::fixup_after_fork ()? 
>> 
>> dll_crt0_1 calls fork.
>> 
>> It seemed like it was possible that the static mutex value would be
>> overwritten when fork is called.  That's not handled in
>> MTinterface::fixup_after_fork, is it?
>
>No, because I am handling it in MTinterface::init, which is called from
>dll_crt0_1. I suspect it was handling it too early though.
>
>Anyway, it's NO_COPY now, so that should be fixed.

It does seem to be working fine.  Test suite works.  "make all" works.

Did we ever figure out Pierre's problem, though?  I never saw a
resolution for that.

cgf