Re: [PATCH] system.3: Indicate MT-Unsafe

[Adhemerval Zanella <adhemerval.zanella@linaro.org>]

On 06/10/2020 13:15, Nate Karstens via Libc-alpha wrote:
> The fact that system(3) does not support pthread_atfork(3) also means
> that it is not thread safe. See the discussion for the proposal of a
> close-on-fork flag in the 2020 April and May timeframe, especially:
> 
> https://lkml.org/lkml/2020/5/15/1067
> 
> Signed-off-by: Nate Karstens <nate.karstens@garmin.com>

Not sure if man pages characterizes file descriptor leak as mt-unsafe, at
least we don't have this concept on glibc manual.  In fact, I think adding
a MT-Unsafe mark to this potentially make any libc call that is not atomic
potentially MT-Unsafe, either when they do not concurrent trigger race
issues regarding memory semantic. At least I think it should add a 'race'
mark to indicate what exactly is MT-unsafe (as for other implementations).

> ---
>  man3/system.3 | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/man3/system.3 b/man3/system.3
> index aef40417a..8730fabd3 100644
> --- a/man3/system.3
> +++ b/man3/system.3
> @@ -127,7 +127,7 @@ l l l.
>  Interface	Attribute	Value
>  T{
>  .BR system ()
> -T}	Thread safety	MT-Safe
> +T}	Thread safety	MT-Unsafe
>  .TE
>  .SH CONFORMING TO
>  POSIX.1-2001, POSIX.1-2008, C89, C99.
>