[cpp-threads] Web site updated

[Paul E. McKenney]

On Tue, Feb 13, 2007 at 10:48:43PM -0000, Boehm, Hans wrote:
> > From: Paul E. McKenney [mailto:paulmck at linux.vnet.ibm.com] 
> > These constraints seem completely at odds with any attempt to 
> > define something that works in a multithreaded environment.
>
> I think that so long as we directly target only user-level threads, the
> constraints still allow us to produce enough of a definition that we can
> guarantee safety (as opposed to liveness) of multithreaded code.
>
> already sort of have that problem for single-threaded code.  A
> hypothetical one-instruction-per-millenium machine could already be
> conforming, though it might be hard to sell.

I am concerned about algorithms that interact via signal handlers.
The mainline code interacts with a signal handler on the same
CPU, and the signal handler does the multi-CPU operations.  I am
willing to exclude non-atomic_${TYPEKEY} types in this case.

							Thanx, Paul

> Hans
> > 
> > I suppose one could separately call out the non-binding notes 
> > that are absolutely required in order to attain reliable 
> > multithreaded operation.
> > Any experience with this approach?
> > 
> > 							Thanx, Paul
> >