[Lcms-user] Re: is LCMS thread safe?

[<ma...@li...>]

Hi,

I'm forwarding this to mailing list... could be interesting for someone else.

> I have been looking through some of the LCMS code and it seems like it is
> not
> thread-safe. In particular I looked at
>
> cmsTakeProductName
> cmsTakeProductDesc
> cmsTakeProductInfo
>
> all of which have static chars defined that could cause threading issues.
> Is there a particular reason why these are set as statics? What would
> happen if I would just change that.

Yes, you are right. Those functions are NOT thread safe, since they
write to a static buffer. However, those  functions are ment to be used
on UI only. The transform code is thread safe with USE_C method.
I did check on a multiprocessor machine and did work.

And you can change them if wish so... I used the static buffer just for
simplicity sake. Nothing prevents to use a buffer pointer as a parameter,
for example. But please note that those functions would be very rarely used
on separated threads.

About the "nDoAbort". This is supposed to be a global setting. Probably
a multithreaded application would replace whole error handling by its own.
Is as easy as write repacements for cmsSignalError() and cmsErrorAction().

Regards,
Martí Maria
The little cms project
http://www.littlecms.com
ma...@li...




----- Original Message -----
From: "Dhiraj Kacker" <dk...@sh...>
To: "'Martí Maria'" <ma...@li...>
Sent: Tuesday, March 05, 2002 12:09 AM
Subject: is LCMS thread safe?


> Hi Marti,
>
> I have been looking through some of the LCMS code and it seems like it is
> not
> thread-safe. In particular I looked at
>
> cmsTakeProductName
> cmsTakeProductDesc
> cmsTakeProductInfo
>
> all of which have static chars defined that could cause threading issues.
> Is there a particular reason why these are set as statics? What would
> happen if I would just change that.
>
> Also in the error handling the gloabal variable "nDoAbort" is used making
> that too risky to use with multiple threads.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> -Dhiraj
>
>