----- Original Message ----- > From: "Andreas Schwab" <schwab@xxxxxxx> > To: "Mathieu Desnoyers" <mathieu.desnoyers@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > Cc: "David Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, libc-alpha@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Sent: Wednesday, October 2, 2013 4:11:23 AM > Subject: Re: Race and segmentation fault in pthread_kill() vs thread teardown > > The POSIX spec is pretty clear: > > If an application attempts to use a thread ID whose lifetime has ended, > the behavior is undefined. > > I'd suggest to file a bug report with the Austin group wrt to the > wording in pthread_kill. CCing man pages maintainers, Interestingly enough, the specification has been updated: http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/functions/pthread_kill.html to remove the ESRCH return value in Issue 7 Austin Group Interpretation 1003.1-2001 #142 is applied, removing the [ESRCH] error condition. It looks like a discrepancy between the spec and the man page that causes this confusion. We might want to update pthread_kill(3), keeping ESRCH documented, but clearly marked as deprecated, and clarify that calling pthread_kill() on a non-existing thread is undefined. We should probably remove this part entirely: " but error checking is still per‐ formed; this can be used to check for the existence of a thread ID." Thoughts ? Thanks, Mathieu > > Andreas. > > -- > Andreas Schwab, SUSE Labs, schwab@xxxxxxx > GPG Key fingerprint = 0196 BAD8 1CE9 1970 F4BE 1748 E4D4 88E3 0EEA B9D7 > "And now for something completely different." > -- Mathieu Desnoyers EfficiOS Inc. http://www.efficios.com -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-man" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
