From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 63200 invoked by alias); 2 Nov 2016 15:32:46 -0000 Mailing-List: contact libc-alpha-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: libc-alpha-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 63190 invoked by uid 89); 2 Nov 2016 15:32:46 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-0.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY autolearn=no version=3.3.2 spammy=detection, month X-HELO: shards.monkeyblade.net Date: Wed, 02 Nov 2016 15:32:00 -0000 Message-Id: <20161102.113238.241484722789762790.davem@davemloft.net> To: triegel@redhat.com Cc: andreas@gaisler.com, libc-alpha@sourceware.org, adhemerval.zanella@linaro.org, carlos@redhat.com, software@gaisler.com Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/2] Make sparcv8 work again on cas enabled hardware From: David Miller In-Reply-To: <1478081121.7146.673.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1478018801.7146.655.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20161101.125117.2228115672691137607.davem@davemloft.net> <1478081121.7146.673.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2016-11/txt/msg00061.txt.bz2 From: Torvald Riegel Date: Wed, 02 Nov 2016 11:05:21 +0100 > I know about the available techniques; my question was rather aimed at > who's going to do the work, in which rough stages, and when. I'm starting to clear up my backlog and find time to work on glibc so it is likely I can do it over the next month or so. > Or do you intend to write sparc-specific versions of all the concurrent > data structures that are process-shared? This would be necessary anyways, if we have two modes. One that does the pure-userland code path and one that does the kernel helper code path. Furthermore, sparc specific versions are needed in any case since we have the v9 detection even in the v8 libraries. Look at all of the code that checks for v9 in the dl_hwcap mask when deciding which atomic operation to use. > If you want sparc-specific versions, who's going to implement them, > and when? What do we do in the meantime? See above.