[cgl_discussion] Re: POSIX requirements question for TEMs/ISV s/OEMs

Chen, Terence terence.chen at intel.com
Tue Feb 11 15:08:23 PST 2003


We are working on the CGL 2.0 requirements spec upgrades to reflect the IEEE
POSIX 1003.2001. Looks like we will cover all functions in POSIX thread with
very few optional functions. Will post the spec upgrades to [cgl_specs]
sometime next week.

-Terence

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Howell, David P 
> Sent: Tuesday, February 11, 2003 8:15 AM
> To: Pradeep Kathail; Chen, Terence; cgl discussion
> Subject: RE: [cgl_discussion] Re: POSIX requirements question for
> TEMs/ISVs/OEMs
> 
> 
> These are all covered in the basic POSIX threading feature 
> set specification which I am assuming is already a 
> requirement. There may be upgrades for 1003.2001, but I think 
> that we are signed up to that already.
> 
> Am I missing something? I know that we have been running the 
> POSIX threads 
> tests since CGL began and most of these obejcts (except 
> barriers) were part of this testing. Might it be right to 
> call out the rev of the standard that we will conform to, 
> assuming that the thread lock objects are included?
> 
> Doing this piece-meal is also wrong, at least let's call out 
> the threads component of POSIX which includes these if we are 
> going this way. Specific feature sets, like real-time 
> extensions to the base, should be called out
> in addition to the base capabilities. 
> 
> Dave Howell  
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Pradeep Kathail [mailto:pkathail at cisco.com] 
> Sent: Tuesday, February 11, 2003 9:31 AM
> To: Chen, Terence; cgl discussion
> Subject: [cgl_discussion] Re: POSIX requirements question for 
> TEMs/ISVs/OEMs
> 
> At 2/4/2003 10:19 AM -0800, Chen, Terence wrote:
> >All, 
> >
> >As we are working on the CGL 2.0 requirements spec, I have a POSIX
> >requirements question that will need your help. Your input 
> is extremely
> >important especially if your telecom application is 
> currently relies on
> >POSIX functions .....
> >
> >Currently CGL 1.1 spec listed 6 POSIX interface (objects) 
> APIs compliance as
> >requirements. They are Timer, Signal, Message Queue, 
> Semaphore, and Event
> >Log. 
> >
> >Question: What are other POSIX objects that your telecom 
> application relies
> >on that we should consider to add to CGL 2.0 spec as new 
> requirements? For
> >example, we might consider to add Mutex (under <pthread.h> 
> ). Is there any
> >others?
> 
> Here is the priortized list from my perspective:
>   Mutex
>   Reader-Writer Lock
>   CondVars
>   Barrier
> 
> Brgds.
> Pradeep
> 
> >Regards,
> >
> >-Terence
> >
> >These are my opinions and absolutely not official opinions 
> of Intel Corp. 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> cgl_discussion mailing list
> cgl_discussion at lists.osdl.org
> http://lists.osdl.org/mailman/listinfo/cgl_discussion
> 



More information about the cgl_discussion mailing list