From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp-out1.suse.de (smtp-out1.suse.de [195.135.220.28]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 66C333955409 for ; Tue, 8 Jun 2021 14:31:43 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org 66C333955409 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=stgolabs.net Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=fail smtp.mailfrom=stgolabs.net Received: from imap.suse.de (imap-alt.suse-dmz.suse.de [192.168.254.47]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp-out1.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7C61D219C1; Tue, 8 Jun 2021 14:31:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: from imap3-int (imap-alt.suse-dmz.suse.de [192.168.254.47]) by imap.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 23A03118DD; Tue, 8 Jun 2021 14:31:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: from director2.suse.de ([192.168.254.72]) by imap3-int with ESMTPSA id kUhXOEZ/v2D8DwAALh3uQQ (envelope-from ); Tue, 08 Jun 2021 14:31:34 +0000 Date: Tue, 8 Jun 2021 07:31:26 -0700 From: Davidlohr Bueso To: Peter Zijlstra Cc: Greg KH , Andrey Semashev , Nicholas Piggin , =?utf-8?B?QW5kcsOvwr/CvQ==?= Almeida , acme@kernel.org, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior , corbet@lwn.net, Darren Hart , fweimer@redhat.com, joel@joelfernandes.org, kernel@collabora.com, krisman@collabora.com, libc-alpha@sourceware.org, linux-api@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, malteskarupke@fastmail.fm, Ingo Molnar , pgriffais@valvesoftware.com, Peter Oskolkov , Steven Rostedt , shuah@kernel.org, Thomas Gleixner , z.figura12@gmail.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 00/15] Add futex2 syscalls Message-ID: <20210608143126.xd6fvtdnoq6annq7@offworld> References: <1622799088.hsuspipe84.astroid@bobo.none> <1622853816.mokf23xgnt.astroid@bobo.none> <6d8e3bb4-0cef-b991-9a16-1f03d10f131d@gmail.com> <1622980258.cfsuodze38.astroid@bobo.none> <1623114630.pc8fq7r5y9.astroid@bobo.none> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: NeoMutt/20201120 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, KAM_DMARC_STATUS, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_SOFTFAIL, TXREP autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on server2.sourceware.org X-BeenThere: libc-alpha@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Libc-alpha mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 08 Jun 2021 14:31:44 -0000 On Tue, 08 Jun 2021, Peter Zijlstra wrote: >On Tue, Jun 08, 2021 at 01:13:30PM +0200, Greg KH wrote: >> On Tue, Jun 08, 2021 at 02:03:50PM +0300, Andrey Semashev wrote: >> So what's keeping the futex2 code from doing all that futex1 does so >> that the futex1 code can be deleted internally? > >I'd much rather see it the other way around. Much of what futex2 does >can already be done with the futex1 code-base. And then we can add >features on top. Yeah furthermore, how can futex2 be thought of replacing futex1 in the future when the PI aspects haven't even been mentioned? Thanks, Davidlohr