[poppler] RFC: upstream optional threading support in pdftoppm for simple testing

[Adam Reichold]

Hello again,

Am 07.04.2013 16:31, schrieb Adam Reichold:
> Hello,
> 
> Am 07.04.2013 16:13, schrieb Albert Astals Cid:
>> El Dissabte, 6 d'abril de 2013, a les 17:43:54, Adam Reichold va escriure:
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> Am 06.04.2013 17:14, schrieb Albert Astals Cid:
>>>> El Divendres, 5 d'abril de 2013, a les 21:43:28, Adam Reichold va 
>> escriure:
>>>>> Hello again,
>>>>>
>>>>> I was a bit in a rush at the first try. Sorry for that, I tidied it up
>>>>> slightly.
>>>>
>>>> Maybe we should rename from UTILS_USE_THREAD to UTILS_USE_PTHREAD ?
>>>>
>>>> Or add a comment somewhere that we only support pthreads for now
>>>> somewhere?
>>>
>>> I would be fine with both.
>>>
>>> Actually, since this is mostly meant for testing, I would be fine with
>>> not making it accessible via autotools or CMake at all, i.e. just add
>>> the definition to 'config.h' manually when and if we need it.
>>
>> Makes sense to me, code-wise what's the difference between this and the code 
>> Thomas posted in the threading bug? Do you think this is simpler/easier to 
>> understand?
> 
> Yes, the difference is that I left out the Windows-specific part and
> tried to keep it as simple as possible. For example, I think
> synchronizing on the job queue is simpler than synchronizing on the
> thread state. But of course, my implementation is not very efficient in
> terms of performance, just sufficient for testing.
> 
> Best regards, Adam.

Thinking about it some more, there is one reason to keep this accessible
via autotools: The 'builder' part of 'regtest' could always build it
using pthreads and use something '-j 2' by default to improve the
usefulness of the regression tests. But I'd say this is for Carlos to
decide.

Best regards, Adam.

>> Cheers,
>>   Albert
>>
>>>
>>> Best regards, Adam.
>>>
>>>> Besides that it looks ok-ish in a quick look.
>>>>
>>>> Anyone has a comment?
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>>
>>>>   Albert
>>>>>
>>>>> Best regards, Adam.
>>>>>
>>>>> Am 05.04.2013 19:27, schrieb Adam Reichold:
>>>>>> Hello everyone,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> To make it easier for us to test changes w.r.t. to threading, I would
>>>>>> propose to commit a simple implementation of threading in 'pdftoppm' to
>>>>>> master.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The attached patch contains a very simple implementation that is not
>>>>>> focused on maximal performance but should suffice to stress the locking
>>>>>> inside Poppler's core. I opted to implement only the POSIX approach
>>>>>> since I suppose POSIX systems are where most of us test and the code is
>>>>>> hopefully simple and short enough not become a maintenance burden.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What do you think?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Best regards, Adam.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> poppler mailing list
>>>>>> poppler at lists.freedesktop.org
>>>>>> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/poppler
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> poppler mailing list
>>>> poppler at lists.freedesktop.org
>>>> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/poppler
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> poppler mailing list
>>> poppler at lists.freedesktop.org
>>> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/poppler
>> _______________________________________________
>> poppler mailing list
>> poppler at lists.freedesktop.org
>> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/poppler
>>
> _______________________________________________
> poppler mailing list
> poppler at lists.freedesktop.org
> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/poppler
>