git.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Johannes Sixt <j.sixt@viscovery.net>
To: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Cc: Brandon Casey <drafnel@gmail.com>,
	"git@vger.kernel.org" <git@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] usage: refactor die-recursion checks
Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2013 16:13:56 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <516D5CA4.7000500@viscovery.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130416130154.GA17976@sigill.intra.peff.net>

Am 4/16/2013 15:01, schrieb Jeff King:
> On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 09:18:46AM +0200, Johannes Sixt wrote:
> 
>>> Yeah, that seems sane; my biggest worry was that it would create
>>> headaches for Windows folks, who would have to emulate pthread_key. But
>>> it seems like we already added support in 9ba604a.
>>
>> pthread_key is not a problem, but pthread_once is. It's certainly
>> solvable, but do we really have to?
> 
> I'm not clear on what you are suggesting. That we protect only the main
> thread from recursion, or that we drop the check entirely? Or that we
> implement thread-local storage for this case without using pthread_once?

Anything(*) that does not require pthread_once. A pthread_once
implementation on Windows would be tricky and voluminous and and on top of
it very likely to be done differently for gcc and MSVC. I don't like to go
there if we can avoid it.

(*) That includes doing nothing, but does not include ripping out the
recursion check, as it protects us from crashes.

-- Hannes

  reply	other threads:[~2013-04-16 14:14 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-04-15 23:06 [PATCH 0/3] avoid bogus "recursion detected in die handler" message Jeff King
2013-04-15 23:08 ` [PATCH 1/3] usage: refactor die-recursion checks Jeff King
2013-04-15 23:45   ` Eric Sunshine
2013-04-15 23:47     ` Jeff King
2013-04-16  0:11   ` Brandon Casey
2013-04-16  0:42     ` Jeff King
2013-04-16  1:41       ` Jonathan Nieder
2013-04-16  2:34       ` Brandon Casey
2013-04-16  2:50         ` Jeff King
2013-04-16  7:18           ` Johannes Sixt
2013-04-16 13:01             ` Jeff King
2013-04-16 14:13               ` Johannes Sixt [this message]
2013-04-16 19:44                 ` [PATCH v2 0/2] avoid bogus "recursion detected in die handler" message Jeff King
2013-04-16 19:46                   ` [PATCH v2 1/2] usage: allow pluggable die-recursion checks Jeff King
2013-04-16 19:50                   ` [PATCH v2 2/2] run-command: use thread-aware die_is_recursing routine Jeff King
2013-04-16 22:09                     ` Junio C Hamano
2013-04-17  0:49                   ` [PATCH v2 0/2] avoid bogus "recursion detected in die handler" message Jonathan Nieder
2013-04-17  1:37                     ` Jeff King
2013-04-23 21:27                   ` Erik Faye-Lund
2013-04-15 23:08 ` [PATCH 2/3] run-command: factor out running_main_thread function Jeff King
2013-04-16  1:45   ` Jonathan Nieder
2013-04-16  2:53     ` Jeff King
2013-04-15 23:09 ` [PATCH 3/3] usage: do not check die recursion outside main thread Jeff King

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=516D5CA4.7000500@viscovery.net \
    --to=j.sixt@viscovery.net \
    --cc=drafnel@gmail.com \
    --cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=peff@peff.net \
    --subject='Re: [PATCH 1/3] usage: refactor die-recursion checks' \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
on how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox