From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on inbox.vuxu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.4 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FROM,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: (qmail 26616 invoked from network); 31 Mar 2020 19:46:02 -0000 Received-SPF: pass (mother.openwall.net: domain of lists.openwall.com designates 195.42.179.200 as permitted sender) receiver=inbox.vuxu.org; client-ip=195.42.179.200 envelope-from= Received: from mother.openwall.net (195.42.179.200) by inbox.vuxu.org with UTF8ESMTPZ; 31 Mar 2020 19:46:02 -0000 Received: (qmail 23794 invoked by uid 550); 31 Mar 2020 19:45:57 -0000 Mailing-List: contact musl-help@lists.openwall.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-ID: Reply-To: musl@lists.openwall.com Received: (qmail 23772 invoked from network); 31 Mar 2020 19:45:57 -0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=gmx.net; s=badeba3b8450; t=1585683945; bh=xQj4SC13UUU3DRyoRQLBg1wMl/ccHSQD66uudrMhqtw=; h=X-UI-Sender-Class:Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To; b=EbL2eShPLL2dDucK4USxcchZ+idS7g3bElxrdcPbdWsQHurYAmuZCIGWzfNIpRp6B EMX8Nc2BkjNZEl5heyQNV3DkYyNcq+x80Sn7PLNKLlWLUZhfIMe2A1rYCYnwZONV4K LLJl87yao2GfznDkI59SlQ2E0RmJdbBEOaRIHsbs= X-UI-Sender-Class: 01bb95c1-4bf8-414a-932a-4f6e2808ef9c Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2020 21:45:44 +0200 From: Markus Wichmann To: "Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)" Cc: musl@lists.openwall.com Message-ID: <20200331194544.GC2683@voyager> References: <5a0db239-4121-8a70-832a-e43ce7632d8e@ncentric.com> <20200331150912.GU11469@brightrain.aerifal.cx> <20200331152646.GV11469@brightrain.aerifal.cx> <20200331172120.GA2683@voyager> <20200331173724.GW11469@brightrain.aerifal.cx> <20200331183839.GB2683@voyager> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28) X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:3Q6EzdJxuY/RzqcoETDGJZ+OSy3JBR6kNcz4WV8PgA95c7SKvH8 A0rRnez6LYeESGSYkfqipYM6APQt1C+usQsJ+xT64Ml8+/es6AkESGxMIablwP64lMMqI+m D3undkrbquLmDssWTaaWKH9bJLn+3Qro50ncPBVOSB3JUUgdVTGedYN2dWBCj9vUo+0+MTI DxsVJmXHVMYG2x+Hmo/xg== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V03:K0:9va/k+3FYig=:vt8/LE6IFrlxi5QbZUC4pP Z5lx1bSyT+/1bhetCMEqtsKsHXyXSYHjAy+ZimLY8l8tLbD5FYp8LGu7Dm7RSWeS+Hm/26cFj YZyUMe/x4mzr5WeoUjILOjVRZR1BDkZFsmHNf3H7A3j2e66J6ZgZ5yD8EQ/WyLO2E9NBKmtFp KblNAgk4W9/b3i7TczpLyZChnaGEIkQJ0eUjfu2A0SeyNi+h1Nbe0a42pro/HRyQWHw81QhHC vEa6xqROk1DDUsOK6XzCjU8WGvnZq6yrHamCmnuoiZzrLvrS3D9HJmy59GtoyIrC89frHZENl IuUn9wVfozx9Pg9w3oO+PYH3wSXXZx1Xtg6jxwY46+hmZdtg/+cubdRwpiFKhFBXnlaT22BE2 fHdMh5ZOQS/jxn31qdFVlOUdlQHPxfofUCGQLoZLND6EHUWFMdU8GHl7uwdFcbZs+igCtN+m+ iwQ3fXa/vItAChfa6BVs0g/pVG4uoY07XajYyDbr76xi/c/xa+01e15TA+ZdiBdsdkfTVVbN4 TCPHeELu006i8eMpsCQoquNguxAIisR5O4J/M/i+ZLsc8UNL2y80L4yIa0mY1LWq3nVchQo2/ eA35F3P7QX1n346isnbqz2aaH8G8qSMDChJR9Z8vOEsJU8fSMyNN5MZXEOairnc6tSp6MXahk 7MpYMBswQJjG/ix4tQ2XBsKe3BFeJfg7eIB5+WiPJJbcoXARp4k1cSbI0NbHnZP2FS1f3wBWI ks8ZO/uMrVwdv/y6UxABiPYD/20HN1jxEc6iWY1FictEqEFh5/Mt7AV8Wh3BDS8NYZSuoJiyv CodWz/+TUcVDGhUUr5Mh2HCRbLrLfB5cqYQAAfsY12iTq3sIctAcl+jNB7poQcSaET8wUyUyo yFCgNN7SFWNdXoo0E0bJ2ZPCoWqvd6YGvKFOPeqmLrH5TTQaI+0cW3ZtuYLrOJ0Dny1rfI5yf sLz4xjB23u0W+au8lv6RaZom79uVrMtYVTeDaZX6LWI8DrVbBNf4XquZGT1ZswP4bQI5mDS0g ZSwWElTEPGXPXcFLI6FHcVxsIoYGmgRQE9bOgzN7qpHf580Yw/NarMoxTfQGSa50SXyvF/H7J 8nnGT/mYQADNSFMJOeqvmyfzstpsIR6hxNkhuFmq3lpW8cefnLsNlZkSGygIwFVC+aH30mJVX LIHQVEmnHLxa3mvyeyI9dA3U/HrWvLs7kqb8UP6paEPjUwl5l7dURSctLu0p6o7uB5+8xhpRr 6aXLJtxBrvwV9O2tu Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [musl] Simple question regarding read-write locks precedence On Tue, Mar 31, 2020 at 09:02:24PM +0200, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrot= e: > So, is there still something you think needs fixing in the page? > Yes. |This is ignored by glibc because the POSIX requirement to support |recursive writer locks would cause this option to create trivial |deadlocks;[...] There is no POSIX requirement to support recursive writer locks. I think this is meant to say "recursive reader locks". Ciao, Markus