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 [170.10.129.124]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BE9683856DDF for ; Wed, 10 May 2023 21:31:28 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org BE9683856DDF Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1683754288; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to; bh=HIhBoVhb6jXq5xdXbsjSoldZfBIgXlugeE1ba/iIrWE=; b=UaBQfW7tESjow3izu21voK0DmjpMpcUmdI2FGam88G+oVokM7N3NkpR13bpJSumpttotv6 LYNd6Yb/QJZ/KRnJjlXfN0cj7Xkp00y/XA7udG4Zb9lm8vLl3/m2AEJ3NkvP6/68/kRKj2 AEDyXVdHj1HpfNNK/8TBOoNNwAmjhnE= Received: from mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (mx3-rdu2.redhat.com [66.187.233.73]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-39-FOcnyJmmP6eWjGncQE3Kaw-1; Wed, 10 May 2023 17:31:25 -0400 X-MC-Unique: FOcnyJmmP6eWjGncQE3Kaw-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.rdu2.redhat.com [10.11.54.9]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0EC4B3C0ED58; Wed, 10 May 2023 21:31:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: from greed.delorie.com (unknown [10.22.8.103]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EEFC5401061; Wed, 10 May 2023 21:31:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: from greed.delorie.com.redhat.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by greed.delorie.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 34ALVOQ41790235; Wed, 10 May 2023 17:31:24 -0400 From: DJ Delorie To: Adhemerval Zanella Netto Cc: libc-alpha@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] i386: Use pthread_barrier for synchronization on tst-bz21269 In-Reply-To: <432b24f2-3943-3156-f4bb-4e8aeb2089cf@linaro.org> Date: Wed, 10 May 2023 17:31:24 -0400 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 3.1 on 10.11.54.9 X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.5 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,KAM_NUMSUBJECT,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_NONE,TXREP,T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org List-Id: Adhemerval Zanella Netto writes: > On 02/03/23 17:21, DJ Delorie wrote: >> I'm not opposed to removing it. Even with the fixed I put in, the test >> is still more likely to fault "for some reason" than for the expected >> reason. >> > > Ok, this LGTM then. The patchwork false positive failures is being really > annoying. We dropped the ball on this one. We ended up with three options: 1> Adhemerval's v4 patch https://sourceware.org/pipermail/libc-alpha/2023-February/145934.html 2> DJ's v3 patch https://sourceware.org/pipermail/libc-alpha/2023-March/145999.html 3> remove the test Which option were you agreeing to, and do you still agree to it?