X-Spam-Check-By:	sourceware.org
Date:	Wed, 21 Jun 2006 10:36:10 -0400
From:	Christopher Faylor <cgf-no-personal-reply-please AT cygwin DOT com>
To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject:	Re: Thread Injection + Cygwin problems
Message-ID:	<20060621143610.GA24567@trixie.casa.cgf.cx>
Reply-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
References:	<449729AA DOT 4030007 AT arkasoft DOT com> <e77avt$oj9$2 AT sea DOT gmane DOT org> <20060620142945 DOT GH19534 AT trixie DOT casa DOT cgf DOT cx> <4498EABF DOT 2040605 AT arkasoft DOT com>
Mime-Version:	1.0
In-Reply-To:	<4498EABF.2040605@arkasoft.com>
User-Agent:	Mutt/1.5.11
Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Unsubscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-unsubscribe-archive-cygwin=delorie DOT com AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender:	cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com

On Wed, Jun 21, 2006 at 07:44:15AM +0100, Kaveh Goudarzi wrote:
>cgf wrote:
>>The problem may be due to the fact that the injected thread doesn't have
>>a cygtls area.  If the thread is injected prior to the completion of
>>cygwin's initialization or if it somehow bypasses the DLL_THREAD_ATTACH
>>phase of the initialization (which was one problem that I had to deal
>>with in the dreaded "cygwin loops forever" problem) then there will be
>>no cygtls area and using cygwin functions will be problematic.
>
>[snip]
>
>As for the cygtls area ...  is this something necessary for proper
>functioning of cygwin calls?  (I looked at the source ...  but none the
>wise I'm afraid :-( ) ...

"Using cygwin functions will be problematic":  Some simple functions will
work some other functions will crash, some may hang.

>Empirically I see getenv working now "all" the time but the call to
>cyg_internal seems to fail with regularity.  Is this expected?

Sorry.  Don't know.  I've given you the basic facts but researching this
further is not something that I'm interested in doing.  Your use is
very much a corner case and if it doesn't work then I'm not terribly
concerned.  However, if you think you have a fix for the behavior you
can certainly submit it to cygwin-patches.

cgf

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

- Raw text -