On Oct 5, 2006, at 3:42 AM, YAMAMOTO Takashi wrote:

> thanks for working on it.

No problem.

> my original intention was that, an lwp only manipulates
> its own lwp specific data.  (except special cases like lwp-startup)
> by limiting the usage in this way, getspecific can be very cheap.
> ie. no locking or memory-writes.
> i'm not sure how much difference it can make, tho.

I'll add a specificdata_getspecific_unlocked() to handle the per-LWP  
case.  Other things, like procs, sessions, etc. need to have the  
locking.

-- thorpej