On Mon, Oct 4, 2010 at 11:43 PM, Siarhei Siamashka <siarhei.siamas...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Monday 04 October 2010 13:19:45 Andrea Canciani wrote: >> On Sun, Oct 3, 2010 at 10:52 PM, Siarhei Siamashka >> >> <siarhei.siamas...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > From: Siarhei Siamashka <siarhei.siamas...@nokia.com> >> > >> > There is attribute 'constructor' supported since gcc 2.7 which allows >> > to have a constructor function for library initialization. This >> > eliminates an extra branch for each composite operation and also helps >> > to avoid complains from race condition detection tools like helgrind. >> >> I'm working on threadsafety issues, too, but I don't have a patch ready >> I pushed >> http://cgit.freedesktop.org/~ranma42/pixman/commit/?h=wip/simpleops which >> adds atomic refcounting and (private, automatically called) >> init/fini functions to pixman. >> >> Currently the simpleops library (available at >> http://cgit.freedesktop.org/~ranma42/simpleops ) >> is not complete, but in a not very distant future it should provide >> some commonly >> available features that with different syntax on each os/compiler (in >> particular, atomics, >> mutexes, integers of various sizes, constructors/destructors, thread >> local storage). >> It should basically be a bunch of headers to hide the >> platform-specific naming and some >> autotools magic to detect what is available. >> >> I'm working on MacOS X and Ubuntu and compiling with gcc for x86_64, >> so most of the >> library is untested, but I expect only minor changes to be needed in >> most cases, since >> it is based on code from cairo and/or pixman. >> >> I'm also working on a wip/simpleops branch in cairo, so that the same >> code can be shared >> between the two libraries (and moving non graphic-related code out of >> them). >> >> Does this look like a viable approach for having these functionalities >> in pixman? >> Right now I'm mainly interested in atomic refcounting and valgrind >> cleanness (threadsafe >> initialization, destroying pixman_implementation's upon finalization), >> but cleaning up the >> TLS stuff would be nice, too. > > Yes, I remember. I just was a bit worried about the absence of recent news > from > this front. It's not like you are the only one interested in this stuff ;) > > Should I just drop this simple patch and wait for something better to come > from you soon? I'm trying to get some gradient-related changes into master before 0.20, so I'm afraid that I won't be able to do much work on thread-safety "soon".
The atomic part of simpleops is supposed to work, but untested on most systems. Even if there is some code for DllMain (win32) and #pragma init (suncc), constructors/destructors are actually detected only on gcc-like compilers (i.e. __attribute__). I'd like to put up a win32 dev environment, but last time I tried I didn't manage to, so I'm afraid that completion and testing of simpleops will take more time than you should be willing to wait (before cairo 1.12?). _______________________________________________ Pixman mailing list Pixman@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/pixman
