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

[Albert Astals Cid]

El Diumenge, 7 d'abril de 2013, a les 16:31:52, Adam Reichold va escriure:
> 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.

Thomas would you be OK if we merge this patchset or you'd prefer yours (more 
complex?) to be in?

Cheers,
  Albert

> 
> 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