On Apr 12, 2013, at 7:34 AM, David Holmes wrote: > On 12/04/2013 3:01 PM, Rickard Bäckman wrote: >> >> On Apr 12, 2013, at 1:04 AM, David Holmes wrote: >> >>> On 11/04/2013 11:02 PM, Rickard Bäckman wrote: >>>> On Apr 11, 2013, at 2:39 PM, David Holmes wrote: >>>>> So what did you mean about pthread_semaphore (what is that anyway?) ?? >>>> >>>> Never mind, pthread condition variables. >>> >>> Ah I see. >>> >>>>> >>>>> I really, really, really don't like seeing three versions of this class >>>>> :( Can't BSD and Linux at least share a POSIX version? (And I wonder if >>>>> we can actually mix-n-match UI threads on Solaris with POSIX semaphores >>>>> on Solaris?) >>>> >>>> I don't like it either, our OS code isn't really helpful when it comes do >>>> reusing things :) Not sure how I would layout things to make them only >>>> available on BSD (Not Mac) and Linux. I guess os_posix.hpp with lots of >>>> #ifdefs, but I'm not sure I"m feeling that happy about that. >>> >>> Why would the os_posix version need a lot of ifdefs? >> >> Well, I guess we would need: >> >> (in ifdef pseudo language) >> >> #ifdef (LINUX || (BSD && !APPLE)) >> … >> #endif > > But if it isn't "posix" then we won't be building os_posix - right?
Linux, Solaris, Bsd & Mac builds and include os_posix. They are all "implementing posix" we are just not using the same semaphore implementation on all of them. > >> The second interesting problem this will get us into is that sem_t is not >> declared in this context. Where do we put the #include <semaphore.h>? >> Impossible in os_posix.hpp since it is included in the middle of a class >> definition. I could put it in os.hpp in the #ifdef path that does the >> jvm_platform.h includes, not sure if that is very pretty either. > > Semaphores are already used by the signal handler thread - semaphore.h is > included in os_linux.cpp etc, so why would os_posix be any different ? > > But couldn't we just have a Semaphore.h/cpp with any needed ifdefs? > >>> Do we really have four versions: >>> - linux (posix) >>> - BSD (posix) >>> - Solaris >>> - Mac (different to BSD?) >>> >> >> 3: >> 1) linux & bsd uses the sem_ interface >> 2) solaris uses the sema_ interface >> 3) mac uses the semaphore_ interface > > Okay but if mac is BSD why can't we use bsd ie posix interface instead of the > mach semaphore_ ? Because apple decided not to implement sem_timedwait. On Solaris we use sema_ because sem_ requires us to link with -lrt which we currently don't (and I'm not really feeling like adding it) > > > BTW I like the idea of using the semaphore, we're just haggling on the > details. ;-) I'm fine with that :) /R > > Thanks, > David > >> /R >> >>> ?? >>> >>> David >>> ----- >>
