From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp.web.de (smtp02.web.de [217.72.192.151]) by dsl2.external.hp.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F25EC4829 for ; Sat, 9 Nov 2002 01:45:19 -0700 (MST) Received: from c-180-204-166.n.dial.de.ignite.net ([62.180.204.166] helo=web.de) by smtp.web.de with asmtp (WEB.DE(Exim) 4.91 #2) id 18AREx-000414-00 for parisc-linux@lists.parisc-linux.org; Sat, 09 Nov 2002 09:45:15 +0100 Message-ID: <3DCCC839.EFC91019@web.de> Date: Sat, 09 Nov 2002 09:32:57 +0100 From: "b.gunreben" MIME-Version: 1.0 To: parisc-linux@lists.parisc-linux.org Subject: Re: [parisc-linux] nanosleep References: <200211081116.gA8BGuX28978@mailgate5.cinetic.de> <20021108161225.GD2402@systemhalted> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: parisc-linux-admin@lists.parisc-linux.org Errors-To: parisc-linux-admin@lists.parisc-linux.org List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: parisc-linux developers list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Carlos O'Donell wrote: > > > Hi List, > > I tried to compile glibc2.3.1, and have some problems with the threading support there. > > When using perl with the new glibc on a C240, things seem to work without problems. On > > a 715/33, I get (probably) endless loops with lots of sched_yield() calls. > > glibc 2.3.1 from debian CVS or upstream? This is upstream with hppa patches from the debian tree. The report was probably bad. In the mail thread I mentioned in my previous mail, the nanosleep in the kernel was fixed because of threading problems. If I understand it correctly, threading will always have problems without a realy working nanosleep. Berthold