From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [216.205.24.124]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2EFB23858020 for ; Mon, 19 Oct 2020 10:46:27 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 sourceware.org 2EFB23858020 Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-7-RFlsinClNc-6wuQAVP3kAw-1; Mon, 19 Oct 2020 06:46:23 -0400 X-MC-Unique: RFlsinClNc-6wuQAVP3kAw-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx04.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.14]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B37C464085; Mon, 19 Oct 2020 10:46:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: from oldenburg2.str.redhat.com (ovpn-112-203.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.112.203]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EB8545D9D2; Mon, 19 Oct 2020 10:46:21 +0000 (UTC) From: Florian Weimer To: Tamar Christina Cc: "libc-alpha@sourceware.org" Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] Move ftime to a compatibility symbol References: <20201015130632.90961-1-adhemerval.zanella@linaro.org> <20201015130632.90961-2-adhemerval.zanella@linaro.org> <20201019075518.GJ3819@arm.com> <874kmqd3dc.fsf@oldenburg2.str.redhat.com> <871rhubl2a.fsf@oldenburg2.str.redhat.com> Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2020 12:46:20 +0200 In-Reply-To: (Tamar Christina's message of "Mon, 19 Oct 2020 10:20:57 +0000") Message-ID: <87tuuqa3yb.fsf@oldenburg2.str.redhat.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.14 X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, DKIM_VALID_EF, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS, TXREP autolearn=ham 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: Mon, 19 Oct 2020 10:46:28 -0000 * Tamar Christina: >> Has SPEC ever fixed any standards violations? I don't have access to th= e SPEC >> web site, so I don't know if they have released patches to fix conforman= ce >> bugs in benchmarks. (I recall several discussions about aliasing violat= ions in >> older benchmarks on the GCC lists.) > > They do, and have in the past, but while I can reasonably get one for > SPEC2017, SPEC2006 is no longer maintained as far as I am aware. Here they refused it for SPEC2017: | q1. Will SPEC fix spec_qsort.c? |=20 | a1. No. There are two reasons: |=20 | That's the way it is in real life | The module spec_qsort.c is based directly on the BSD version, as upda= ted Thu Mar 5 17:17:11 2015 UTC in revision 279666: https://svnweb.freebsd.= org/base/head/lib/libc/stdlib/qsort.c?revision=3D279666. | No moving targets | SPEC CPU=C2=AE2017 has already been released. Once source code has be= en released for a benchmark, SPEC strongly prefers not to change the source= code unless there are compelling portability reasons. | | Note, therefore, that the patch attached to GCC bug 83201 is not approved= by SPEC and would not be allowed in a reportable run. > If the header was still there but empty I could do something at link > time, but since it doesn't exist at all I have to provide my own local > headers. Also if you have a list of interfaces glibc plans to remove > we can also feed this on to them to avoid in the next SPEC release. > https://www.spec.org/cpuv8/ There is no such list. There isn't even consensus among glibc developers that it's necessary to provide a deprecation notice before removal. Building with an appropriate version of _POSIX_SOURCE can help. A good indicator is whether a function has been removed by POSIX. Sometimes the manual pages also mark a function as obsolete. Usually, that's sufficient reason to stay away from it. For ftime, this happened some time before 2004. Thanks, Florian --=20 Red Hat GmbH, https://de.redhat.com/ , Registered seat: Grasbrunn, Commercial register: Amtsgericht Muenchen, HRB 153243, Managing Directors: Charles Cachera, Brian Klemm, Laurie Krebs, Michael O'N= eill