From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <libc-alpha-return-109349-listarch-libc-alpha=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 109409 invoked by alias); 10 Feb 2020 09:58:16 -0000
Mailing-List: contact libc-alpha-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <libc-alpha.sourceware.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:libc-alpha-subscribe@sourceware.org>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/>
List-Post: <mailto:libc-alpha@sourceware.org>
List-Help: <mailto:libc-alpha-help@sourceware.org>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: libc-alpha-owner@sourceware.org
Received: (qmail 109394 invoked by uid 89); 10 Feb 2020 09:58:16 -0000
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none
X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-3.8 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 spammy=discrepancies, H*f:sk:mvmo8u6, H*i:sk:mvmo8u6
X-HELO: albireo.enyo.de
From: Florian Weimer <fw@deneb.enyo.de>
To: Andreas Schwab <schwab@suse.de>
Cc: libc-alpha@sourceware.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] nptl: add missing pthread-offsets.h
References: <mvmtv44kjim.fsf@suse.de> <87blqbsgfv.fsf@mid.deneb.enyo.de>
	<mvmo8u6epfq.fsf@suse.de>
Date: Mon, 10 Feb 2020 09:58:00 -0000
In-Reply-To: <mvmo8u6epfq.fsf@suse.de> (Andreas Schwab's message of "Mon, 10
	Feb 2020 10:56:09 +0100")
Message-ID: <87sgji22ah.fsf@mid.deneb.enyo.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
X-SW-Source: 2020-02/txt/msg00255.txt.bz2

* Andreas Schwab:

> On Feb 06 2020, Florian Weimer wrote:
>
>> * Andreas Schwab:
>>
>>> All architectures using their own definition of struct
>>> __pthread_rwlock_arch_t need to provide their own pthread-offsets.h.
>>
>> What's the context for this change?
>
> <mvmpneskjhw.fsf@suse.de>

Which is:

From: Andreas Schwab <schwab@suse.de>
Subject: [PATCH] nptl: update default pthread-offsets.h
To: libc-alpha@sourceware.org
Date: Wed, 05 Feb 2020 18:54:19 +0100

I still don't understand why these discrepancies have not resulted in
test failures.