From: Carlos O'Donell <carlos@redhat.com>
To: libc-alpha <libc-alpha@sourceware.org>,
Adhemerval Zanella <adhemerval.zanella@linaro.org>,
Vineet Gupta <Vineet.Gupta1@synopsys.com>,
Alistair Francis <alistair23@gmail.com>,
"H.J. Lu" <hjl.tools@gmail.com>,
Florian Weimer <fweimer@redhat.com>,
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>,
Chung-Lin Tang <cltang@codesourcery.com>,
Szabolcs Nagy <szabolcs.nagy@arm.com>, DJ Delorie <dj@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: glibc 2.32 release strategy for ABI changes.
Date: Tue, 7 Jul 2020 17:44:55 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ab44870f-4d3d-ea1c-d30c-2ba344a006e6@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <08254651-9c78-9652-3338-2764b0ebbc5e@redhat.com>
Status update time:
On 7/3/20 5:49 PM, Carlos O'Donell wrote:
> (1) I want to see Adhemerval's signum-{generic,arch}.h series pushed
> after a final review. I think this is ready and adds APIs for
> the data we used to export and deprecates the other interfaces.
This is done and pushed.
> (2) I want to see HJ's <sys/platform/x86.h> series reviewed and
> accepted and pushed or deferred for further discussion.
>
> - HJ, Florian, What's the status on this?
This is under review.
> (3) I want to see the __libc_single_thread patches pushed. These
> have been extensively reviewed and are ready for use.
This is done and pushed.
> (4) I want to see the rseq changes pushed. These have been
> extensively reviewed, but testing has shown a problem with
> the audit module framework, but a straight forward fix is
> available for that (raise TLS_TCB_ALIGN as required) [1].
This is done and pushed.
Along with:
- elf: Do not signal LA_ACT_CONSISTENT for an empty namespace [BZ #26076]
(to fix subsequent surplus TLS changes)
> (5) I want to review and get Adhemerval's 64-bit time_t fixes
> pushed.
This is now reviewed.
This unblocks (6) and (7). Full steam ahead.
> (6) I want to see the ARC port pushed *after* (5) and after
> review says they are ready.
>
> - Vineet, If we get all of (5), is anything else needed?
What is our status on the ARC port?
Do we need additional review?
> (7) I want to see the RISC-V 32-bit port pushed *after* (5)
> and after review says they are ready.
>
> - Alistair, If we get all of (5), is there anything else needed?
What is our status on the RISC-V 32-bit port?
Do we need additional review?
> (8) I want to see the SunRPC deprecation pushed *after* (6)
> and after review says they are ready. We want to do it in
> this order to prove that the SunRPC deprecation correctly
> cleans up a port, the ARC port, with a 2.32 baseline and
> removes all trace of the old baseline compat symbols.
I have ack'd or reviewed:
- sunrpc: Remove hidden aliases for global data symbols [BZ #26210]
- sunrpc symbol cleanups
I don't think I've seen a final v6 of the deprecation patches here
https://sourceware.org/pipermail/libc-alpha/2020-June/115574.html
that is a non-RFC.
We should move on that so we can clean this up for ARC and RISC-V 32-bit.
> I want to complete all of this by July 10th (next week).
>
> I do not want to add anything else to this already large list.
>
> The non-ABI fixes can keep going in and I'm particularly keen
> to see these fixes:
>
> (a) AArch64 BTI and PAC-RET.
Status?
> (b) Szabolcs's TLS reservation fixes.
> - Internal ABI changes are OK e.g. GLIBC_PRIVATE.
Reviewed. Needs some fixing up after rseq changes. No semantic problems,
just needing extra TLS surplus to satisfy 8 module tests e.g. tst-auditmany.
> (c) Chung-Lin Tang's DSO sorting fixes.
Reviewed and waiting on new version to review.
> (d) DJ's NSS nsswitch.conf reloading changes.
Next up for me to review.
> (e) Regression fix for en_US date.
Next up for me to post.
> (f) x86: Add thresholds for "rep movsb/stosb" to tunables
Reviewed and pushed.
> I want machine maintainers to test from July 13 to July 30th.
>
> I want to cut the branch August 3rd.
>
> Please review the above details. If anything seems out of place
> please call it out. If we are missing dependencies or if you think
> something won't make the cut, please say so.
>
> As a reminder glibc runs a time boxed release. I will cut features
> and revert code to make the August 3rd release.
--
Cheers,
Carlos.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-07-07 21:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-07-03 21:49 Carlos O'Donell
2020-07-03 22:37 ` Adhemerval Zanella
2020-07-04 3:24 ` Vineet Gupta
2020-07-04 3:37 ` Vineet Gupta
2020-07-04 12:07 ` H.J. Lu
2020-07-06 15:36 ` Joseph Myers
2020-07-06 16:03 ` Carlos O'Donell
2020-07-07 21:44 ` Carlos O'Donell [this message]
2020-07-07 22:06 ` Alistair Francis
2020-07-07 22:08 ` Vineet Gupta
2020-07-08 9:33 ` Szabolcs Nagy
2020-07-08 12:21 ` Szabolcs Nagy
2020-07-08 14:08 ` Szabolcs Nagy
2020-07-08 16:36 ` Szabolcs Nagy
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=ab44870f-4d3d-ea1c-d30c-2ba344a006e6@redhat.com \
--to=carlos@redhat.com \
--cc=Vineet.Gupta1@synopsys.com \
--cc=adhemerval.zanella@linaro.org \
--cc=alistair23@gmail.com \
--cc=cltang@codesourcery.com \
--cc=dj@redhat.com \
--cc=fweimer@redhat.com \
--cc=hjl.tools@gmail.com \
--cc=libc-alpha@sourceware.org \
--cc=mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com \
--cc=szabolcs.nagy@arm.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).