From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 29055 invoked by alias); 25 May 2007 02:26:07 -0000 Received: (qmail 29038 invoked by uid 22791); 25 May 2007 02:26:07 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Fri, 25 May 2007 02:26:02 +0000 Received: from int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (int-mx1.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.254]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id l4P2Q0LM032591 for ; Thu, 24 May 2007 22:26:00 -0400 Received: from lacrosse.corp.redhat.com (lacrosse.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.154]) by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id l4P2PxSK002529 for ; Thu, 24 May 2007 22:25:59 -0400 Received: from myware66.akkadia.org (vpn-14-1.rdu.redhat.com [10.11.14.1]) by lacrosse.corp.redhat.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.11.6) with ESMTP id l4P2Px9t020049 for ; Thu, 24 May 2007 22:25:59 -0400 Message-ID: <46564931.2080009@redhat.com> Date: Fri, 25 May 2007 02:26:00 -0000 From: Ulrich Drepper User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.0 (X11/20070419) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: libc-hacker@sources.redhat.com Subject: Re: gscope + private_futex for alpha References: <20070525003502.GA4853@twiddle.net> In-Reply-To: <20070525003502.GA4853@twiddle.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Mailing-List: contact libc-hacker-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: libc-hacker-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2007-05/txt/msg00023.txt.bz2 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Richard Henderson wrote: > It seems like much of this same code could be shared with all > of the targets, particularly those that define TLS_DTV_AT_TP. Jakub has some patches which I haven't yet looked at. > +#define lll_futex_wait_flags(futexp, val, flags) \ I don't think this is what I want to do. The reason is obvious from the rest of your changes. Your pthread_once cannot work since the wake call doesn't use the private flag the same way. If we'd introduce a new macro like that we'd have a whole lot of places to inspect and debug. I'm looking at the generic situation right soon since even x86-64 needs it for mutexes etc. What I'll probably end up doing it extend the existing macros. This way every usage has to be inspected. - -- ➧ Ulrich Drepper ➧ Red Hat, Inc. ➧ 444 Castro St ➧ Mountain View, CA ❖ -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFGVkkx2ijCOnn/RHQRAjF1AJ9nB9ANs7lbmoJSe0GqaweKjSz4fwCgwXI1 NZeymA0gWKSEHiutmRBry3k= =Dr09 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----