Re: Cilk Library

[Jeff Law <law at redhat dot com>]

On 10/16/13 13:30, Iyer, Balaji V wrote:
> > First, the all issues Joseph mentioned need to be addressed.  So first, you need
> > to ensure it's only being built on x86/x86_64 given the asms and bring together
> > some documentation as to what's needed to port the
> > runtime system to other architectures.   Closely related, I think you
> > initially need to ensure it only builds on x86-linux platforms -- unless you've
> > already verified it works properly on one or more of the bsd platforms, solaris,
> > windows, etc.
>
> We are in the process of addressing all these. I will send out an email with the fixed runtime as soon as I can.
Excellent.  THanks.


> > I would strongly echo Joseph's recommendation to ensure that only those
> > symbols specifically intended to be part of the public interface are exported
> > from the shared library. How stable has the exported API/ABI
> > for Cilk+ been?    Related: how clean is the RTS from a compile-time
> > namespace pollution standpoint.  For C++ is everything in a namespace, for C is
> > everything prefixed appropriately?
>
> We are currently verifying those and making sure only the required symbols are exported.
IMHO, the best way to do this is with linker scripts and it's an 
excellent time ot drop in versioning information.  I'd think this would 
be useful for ICC as well.  This is probably the biggest issue.  I'll 
note Richi chimed in on this as well.

Look at libatomic/libatomic.map and how that gets used.  It gives you 
full control over the exports.

jeff