From: Adhemerval Zanella <adhemerval.zanella@linaro.org>
To: Andreas Larsson <andreas@gaisler.com>
Cc: Torvald Riegel <triegel@redhat.com>,
GNU C Library <libc-alpha@sourceware.org>,
David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>,
"software@gaisler.com" <software@gaisler.com>
Subject: Re: Remove sparcv8 support
Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2016 14:45:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <D71809D1-BF0B-408B-83CB-DA25FB56ACDF@linaro.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <580F6D5E.6050600@gaisler.com>
> On 25 Oct 2016, at 12:34, Andreas Larsson <andreas@gaisler.com> wrote:
>
>> On 2016-10-24 19:42, Adhemerval Zanella wrote:
>>
>>
>>> On 24/10/2016 15:25, Torvald Riegel wrote:
>>>> On Fri, 2016-10-21 at 10:59 +0200, Andreas Larsson wrote:
>>>>> On 2016-10-20 21:47, Adhemerval Zanella wrote:
>>>>> The sparcv8 build is broken since GLIBC 2.23 due the new pthread
>>>>> barrier implementation [1] and since then there is no thread or
>>>>> interest on fixing it (Torvald has suggested some options on
>>>>> 2.23 release thread). It won't help with both new pthread rdlock
>>>>> and cond implementation, although I would expect that it relies
>>>>> on same atomic primitive that was not present for pthread barrier.
>>>>>
>>>>> AFAIK, recent commercial sparc chips from Oracle all supports
>>>>> sparcv9. The only somewhat recent sparc chip with just sparcv8
>>>>> support is LEON4, which I really doubt it cares for glibc support.
>>>>
>>>> Hi!
>>>>
>>>> We do care about GLIBC support for many different LEON3 and LEON4
>>>> systems. GLIBC support for sparcv8 is important for us and it is
>>>> important for our customers. Both LEON3 and LEON4 are continuously used
>>>> in new hardware designs.
>>>
>>> If you do care about it, it would be nice if you could (help) maintain
>>> sparcv8 (e.g., regularly testing most recent glibc on sparcv8, at the
>>> very least early during the freeze of each release). This ensures that
>>> you won't get surprises such as this one, when nobody else is spending
>>> resources on it.
>>>
>>>> We are not always using the latest version of GLIBC (the latest step we
>>>> took was to GLIBC 2.20), so unfortunately we missed this issue. We will
>>>> look into what the extent of the missing support is. Any pointers are
>>>> most welcome.
>>>>
>>>> Do you have a link to the suggested options on the 2.23 release thread?
>>>> I dug around a bit in the archives, but did not find it.
>>>>
>>>> (As a side note, most of the recent LEON3 and LEON4 chips have CAS
>>>> instruction support, but pure sparcv8 support is of course the baseline.)
>>>
>>> Yes, the lack of CAS is the major problem I am aware of. If the chips
>>> you mention do support CAS, then a patch that adds support for the
>>> CAS-based atomic operations in glibc would fix the barrier problem
>>> (because the generic barrier should just work). The patch would also
>>> have to add configure bits or whatever would be appropriate so that
>>> glibc can figure out whether it is supposed to be run on a sparcv8 with
>>> or without CAS.
>>>
>>> What about stopping support for plain sparcv8, and keeping to support
>>> sparcv8+CAS provided that we have a (group of) maintainer(s) for the
>>> latter that can tend to the minimal responsibilities of an arch
>>> maintainer and has the time to do that?
>>
>> At least the build for sparcv9-linux-gnu with -mcpu=leon3 finishes,
>> although I am not sure if it correctly runs on leon processors.
>> And I seconded Tovarld's suggestion about stop maintaining plain
>> sparcv8 and set sparcv8+CAS as the base supported sparc32.
>
> I have mixed feelings about this, but it is certainly better than
> throwing out sparcv8 outright.
>> As pointed out by David Miller, correct support for plain sparcv8
>> could really only be provided with kernel supported. And when
>> it lands on kernel side, it should work effortlessly with a
>> sparcv8 + cas glibc build.
>
> What do you mean by "work effortlessly with a sparcv8 + cas glibc
> build"?
Meaning that even if underlying hardware does not support correct CAS, kernel emulation will provide it and thus a default GLIBC sparc32 build will work regardless.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-10-25 14:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-10-20 19:47 Adhemerval Zanella
2016-10-20 20:56 ` David Miller
2016-10-21 9:02 ` Andreas Larsson
2016-10-21 13:13 ` Adhemerval Zanella
2016-10-21 15:03 ` David Miller
2016-10-24 17:14 ` Torvald Riegel
2016-10-24 17:25 ` Torvald Riegel
2016-10-24 17:43 ` Adhemerval Zanella
2016-10-25 14:34 ` Andreas Larsson
2016-10-25 14:45 ` Adhemerval Zanella [this message]
2016-10-26 14:46 ` Andreas Larsson
2016-10-26 18:03 ` Adhemerval Zanella
2016-10-26 18:47 ` David Miller
2016-10-26 19:39 ` Adhemerval Zanella
2016-10-27 10:54 ` Torvald Riegel
2016-10-27 14:36 ` Carlos O'Donell
2016-11-07 16:38 ` David Miller
2016-11-07 21:21 ` Sam Ravnborg
2016-11-08 1:06 ` David Miller
2016-11-09 5:49 ` Sam Ravnborg
2016-11-10 23:33 ` David Miller
2016-11-09 17:08 ` Torvald Riegel
2016-11-09 17:16 ` David Miller
2016-11-10 5:05 ` Torvald Riegel
2016-11-10 16:41 ` Chris Metcalf
2016-11-10 17:08 ` Torvald Riegel
2016-11-10 18:22 ` Chris Metcalf
2016-11-10 23:38 ` Torvald Riegel
2016-10-27 10:38 ` Torvald Riegel
2016-11-01 15:27 ` Andreas Larsson
2016-10-25 14:34 ` Andreas Larsson
2016-10-25 16:22 ` Torvald Riegel
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=D71809D1-BF0B-408B-83CB-DA25FB56ACDF@linaro.org \
--to=adhemerval.zanella@linaro.org \
--cc=andreas@gaisler.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=libc-alpha@sourceware.org \
--cc=software@gaisler.com \
--cc=triegel@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).