IEEE Standards Interpretations for IEEE Std 1003.1c™-1995 IEEE Standard for Information Technology--Portable Operating System Interface (POSIX(R)) - System Application Program Interface (API) Amendment 2: Threads Extension (C Language)
Copyright © 1996 by the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc. 345 East 47th Street New York, New York 10017 USA All Rights Reserved.
These are interpretations of IEEE Std 1003.1c-1995.
Interpretations are issued to explain and clarify the intent of a standard and do not constitute an alteration to the original standard. In addition, interpretations are not intended to supply consulting information. Permission is hereby granted to download and print one copy of this document. Individuals seeking permission to reproduce and/or distribute this document in its entirety or portions of this document must contact the IEEE Standards Department for the appropriate license. Use of the information contained in this document is at your own risk.
IEEE Standards Department, Copyrights and Permissions, 445 Hoes Lane, Piscataway, New Jersey 08855-1331, USA
Interpretation Request #7
Topic: PTHREAD_INHERIT_SCHED Relevant Clauses: 22.214.171.124
Right now all I have to work from are the draft 8 document, plus the draft 9 and 10 change documents, but draft 10 was approved as the final specification. My question concerns 126.96.36.199 in draft 8 (lines 302-306) This text was not modified by drafts 9 or 10. When a thread is created with a value of PTHREAD_INHERIT_SCHED for the inheritsched attribute, is the scheduling contention scope one of the attributes that is inherited? Or should the new thread get the implementation-defined default scheduling contention scope?
The standard is clear: contentionscope is one of the attributes controlled by inheritsched. IEEE Std 1003.1c-1995, page 296, line 397 states: "The contentionscope attribute defines the scheduling ...." and on line 401 the standard uses this fact ".....set according to the other scheduling attributes in pthread_attr_t object."
Rationale for Interpretation