This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: [patch] pthread_rwlockattr_setkind_np.3: Remove bug notes.
- From: "Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)" <mtk dot manpages at gmail dot com>
- To: "G. Branden Robinson" <g dot branden dot robinson at gmail dot com>, Carlos O'Donell <carlos at redhat dot com>
- Cc: mtk dot manpages at gmail dot com, "linux-man at vger dot kernel dot org" <linux-man at vger dot kernel dot org>, GNU C Library <libc-alpha at sourceware dot org>
- Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2018 07:42:16 +0100
- Subject: Re: [patch] pthread_rwlockattr_setkind_np.3: Remove bug notes.
- References: <b6d241af-1d89-f6f2-e19b-239cc9c6d98f@redhat.com> <20181115152114.7amsm43s4gxxtxvd@crack.deadbeast.net>
On 11/15/18 4:21 PM, G. Branden Robinson wrote:
> At 2018-11-15T10:03:41-0500, Carlos O'Donell wrote:
>> diff --git a/man3/pthread_rwlockattr_setkind_np.3 b/man3/pthread_rwlockattr_setkind_np.3
>> index 3cca7d864..6b2b8db39 100644
>> --- a/man3/pthread_rwlockattr_setkind_np.3
>> +++ b/man3/pthread_rwlockattr_setkind_np.3
> [...]
>> +.\" Here is the relevant wording:
>> +.\"
>> +.\" A thread may hold multiple concurrent read locks on rwlock (that is,
>> +.\" successfully call the pthread_rwlock_rdlock() function n times). If
>> +.\" so, the thread must perform matching unlocks (that is, it must call
>> +.\" the pthread_rwlock_unlock() function n times).
>> +.\"
>> +.\" By making write-priority work correctly, I broke the above requirement,
>> +.\" because. I had no clue that recursive read locks are permissible.
> ^
> This period is not in the original quotation and grammatically doesn't
> belong there.
Fixed.
Thanks, Branden.
Cheers,
Michael
--
Michael Kerrisk
Linux man-pages maintainer; http://www.kernel.org/doc/man-pages/
Linux/UNIX System Programming Training: http://man7.org/training/