RSB and C++ Model
chrisj at rtems.org
Tue Mar 25 04:29:33 UTC 2014
On 25/03/2014 4:41 am, Joel Sherrill wrote:
> On 3/24/2014 12:36 PM, Sebastian Huber wrote:
>> On 03/24/2014 06:14 PM, Joel Sherrill wrote:
>>> My most recently built toolset seems to be using pthreads instead
>>> of the RTEMS thread code. Any ideas?
>> Its due to this patch:
>> We should really avoid using the POSIX GCC thread model. Its too
>> dangerous due to the silent errors.
Yes this is true but it did not fail in the way the RTEMS wrapper did
with SMP. I felt it was the lesser of 2 bad situations.
I also suspect the issue with gcc and the POSIX thread support is still
open and will need to be addressed. As far as I understand the mingw64
tools uses POSIX rather than the win32 thread model with an add on
> I knew the patch and the problem. I was surprised it was included and
> wanted to confirm that we agreed it shouldn't be.
> Should I put together a patch for the RSB?
If we keep using the wrapper that is fine and I will review a patch once
the gxx wrapper changes to fix it have been completed and merged into
master. Sebastian, how is the gxx_wrapper code tested ?
Long term I feel the posix thread model maybe a better path because it
means we need just one supported interface with gcc. The c++11 threading
support will also require pthreads.
More information about the devel