Mailing-List: contact dev-help@harmony.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@harmony.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (herse.apache.org: domain of ronald.servant@gmail.com
 designates 64.233.182.191 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=beta;
        h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references;
        b=fC2xVwtjkhXMYf8fkvEVW8EZfwLWyj2ddinkGA4lMOqA8P+0LLadzDsBa0ud2GAOX6NczDmvwn4JDDdZ8/ruZNucMJo/GMyyG0K+jXlhhuaq7Pj8DHX6nXLqwpD+E7dImi9BXoMloJwr7X1PA2wRlCMC71rA1HPA1OhHvw57cjc=
Message-ID: <9247407c0701261111n3f86f601s8ce4e18e672e6ec9@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2007 14:11:33 -0500
From: "Ronald Servant" <ronald.servant@gmail.com>
To: dev@harmony.apache.org
Subject: Re: [vmi] thread library
In-Reply-To: <45B93BD4.2090203@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <45B78F90.6070605@gmail.com> <ep8bdt$op9$1@sea.gmane.org>
	 <45B93BD4.2090203@gmail.com>

On 1/25/07, Tim Ellison <t.p.ellison@gmail.com> wrote:
[SNIP]
>
> The same thought came to me soon after posting; there is a dependency on
> threadlib from the portlib, and the portlib functions don't get a
> reference that can reach 'back' to the VMI struct.
>
> So while it may be apparent in the launcher, it would be equally
> apparent in the portlib functions themselves, since they would have no
> reachable threadlib.
>
> So maybe, as you say, we need to make the threadlib functions an
> extension of the current portlib function table rather than the VMI
> struct, and have them provided by a DLL loaded by the VM (and the thread
> function table populated in the portlib initialization code).

Making the threadLib functions an extension of the portLib function
table seems a little odd to me.  IMHO it implies that the components
portLib and threadLib are being provide together.  When in fact the
portLib is Harmony code and the threadLib is a per VM implementation.

> Any other options?

We could pass in an initialized threadLibrary into the portLibrary
initialization functions -OR-  we could, as mentioned above have the
portLibrary do the initialization of the thread Library -OR- a mix of
both (pass in a null for threadLibrary means please create one). We
could then add a function to the portLibrary that would return the
threadLibrary function table. In either case, I don't see the thread
functions being a part of the same table as the port functions.

This would also allow us to provide the vmi get thread library
function by using the portLibrary.

I am working on a patch to implement this now with the IBM VME, I hope
to make it available for review/evaluation early next week.


Ronald Servant
-- 
J9 VM Development
IBM Ottawa Software Lab