glibc am33 and cris architectures

glibc am33 and cris architectures

[Joseph S. Myers]

The am33 and cris glibc ports won't have worked since the 2.3-2.5 era for 
lack of NPTL/TLS support.  They are currently on the deprecation list for 
removal after glibc 2.16 is released 
<http://sourceware.org/glibc/wiki/Deprecation>.  But given how long they 
won't have worked, I wonder if we should just remove them now.  Alexandre, 
Hans-Peter - do you have, or know of, any near-term plans to bring your 
respective ports up to date with NPTL and TLS support and updates for all 
the other libc changes in the past several years?  If not, I think it's 
time to remove them.  (Alexandre, since you have write access you can just 
remove the am33 port yourself - "git rm" on the directories sysdeps/am33 
sysdeps/unix/am33 sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/am33 with an appropriate entry 
in ChangeLog.am33.)

-- 
Joseph S. Myers
joseph@codesourcery.com

Re: glibc am33 and cris architectures

[Hans-Peter Nilsson]

> From: "Joseph S. Myers" <joseph@codesourcery.com>
> Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2012 16:21:12 +0100

> The am33 and cris glibc ports won't have worked since the 2.3-2.5 era for 
> lack of NPTL/TLS support.  They are currently on the deprecation list for 
> removal after glibc 2.16 is released 
> <http://sourceware.org/glibc/wiki/Deprecation>.  But given how long they 
> won't have worked, I wonder if we should just remove them now.

For CRIS, I'd suggest to do that.

>  Alexandre, 
> Hans-Peter - do you have, or know of, any near-term plans to bring your 
> respective ports up to date with NPTL and TLS support and updates for all 
> the other libc changes in the past several years?

JFTR, there's a local port, specific to CRIS v32 (a later
variant), with the glibc part based on an import of the
eglibc-2.9 branch.  Linux TLS support (yes, I do mean just the
kernel) is currently missing for CRIS.  That is, it's missing
for CRIS v10, the original GNU/Linux-capable variant
(disregarding earlier MMU-less variants): anyone interested is
advised to please use either $IRP or $BRP as the thread-pointer
register; use the CRIS v32 Linux support as a template with
minor changes in thread-pointer-setting and most changes for
restoring that register at return from interrupt or breakpoint
or syscall return.

GCC TLS support for CRIS v32 needs to be updated and committed
anyway, by itself the least complex part, but not trivial and
even that part is not imminent though hopefully will happen in
the first half of this year.  Still, no commitment for any work
in a time-frame I'd dare call near-term.  Thus, just a glibc
CRIS port update right now wouldn't do much good in practice.

When doing the (e)glibc import part of the TLS support, I
noticed how much had changed since last synch.  I suggest that
even if someone else were to do independent work, it'd be better
to start from scratch than be distracted by the half-way-commit
of the originally submitted code that's currently in place.
Best to remove it; it'll just bloat any CRIS-related patches.

brgds, H-P
(PS. but at least the binutils TLS part is all committed. :)

Re: glibc am33 and cris architectures

[Joseph S. Myers]

On Tue, 21 Feb 2012, Hans-Peter Nilsson wrote:

> > From: "Joseph S. Myers" <joseph@codesourcery.com>
> > Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2012 16:21:12 +0100
> 
> > The am33 and cris glibc ports won't have worked since the 2.3-2.5 era for 
> > lack of NPTL/TLS support.  They are currently on the deprecation list for 
> > removal after glibc 2.16 is released 
> > <http://sourceware.org/glibc/wiki/Deprecation>.  But given how long they 
> > won't have worked, I wonder if we should just remove them now.
> 
> For CRIS, I'd suggest to do that.

Thanks, done.

> When doing the (e)glibc import part of the TLS support, I
> noticed how much had changed since last synch.  I suggest that
> even if someone else were to do independent work, it'd be better
> to start from scratch than be distracted by the half-way-commit
> of the originally submitted code that's currently in place.
> Best to remove it; it'll just bloat any CRIS-related patches.

I suspect ABI compatibility with the old port would also be quite tricky 
(and if it comes back, it may be better for it to come back with a least 
symbol version of GLIBC_2.17 or whatever is the next release version at 
the time, rather than attempting ABI compatibility).

-- 
Joseph S. Myers
joseph@codesourcery.com

Re: glibc am33 and cris architectures

[Alexandre Oliva]

On Feb 21, 2012, "Joseph S. Myers" <joseph@codesourcery.com> wrote:

> The am33 and cris glibc ports won't have worked since the 2.3-2.5 era for 
> lack of NPTL/TLS support.  They are currently on the deprecation list for 
> removal after glibc 2.16 is released 
> <http://sourceware.org/glibc/wiki/Deprecation>.  But given how long they 
> won't have worked, I wonder if we should just remove them now.  Alexandre, 
> Hans-Peter - do you have, or know of, any near-term plans to bring your 
> respective ports up to date with NPTL and TLS support and updates for all 
> the other libc changes in the past several years?  If not, I think it's 
> time to remove them.  (Alexandre, since you have write access you can just 
> remove the am33 port yourself - "git rm" on the directories sysdeps/am33 
> sysdeps/unix/am33 sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/am33 with an appropriate entry 
> in ChangeLog.am33.)

I've long been out of touch WRT am33, but I finally brought this up
within Red Hat folks that are involved with it.

Mark Salter volunteered to contribute the updates he'd worked on, but
that had failed to be contributed because I failed to review the TLS
support patches for GCC and binutils (sorry)

So, instead of removing the port, I suggest we name Mark maintainer of
the am33 port.  Any objections?

-- 
Alexandre Oliva, freedom fighter    http://FSFLA.org/~lxoliva/
You must be the change you wish to see in the world. -- Gandhi
Be Free! -- http://FSFLA.org/   FSF Latin America board member
Free Software Evangelist      Red Hat Brazil Compiler Engineer

Re: glibc am33 and cris architectures

[Joseph S. Myers]

On Fri, 16 Mar 2012, Alexandre Oliva wrote:

> I've long been out of touch WRT am33, but I finally brought this up
> within Red Hat folks that are involved with it.
> 
> Mark Salter volunteered to contribute the updates he'd worked on, but
> that had failed to be contributed because I failed to review the TLS
> support patches for GCC and binutils (sorry)
> 
> So, instead of removing the port, I suggest we name Mark maintainer of
> the am33 port.  Any objections?

I haven't seen any objections; obviously some pretty large patches will be 
needed to bring the port up to date, replace the Linuxthreads port by an 
NPTL port and generally update sysdeps files for several years of libc 
changes that involve all-targets updates, so they are in sync with the 
libc versions again.  And then he'll need to keep a watch on libc commits 
for any that require am33 updates to keep am33 in sync, and make such 
updates to the port as and when such libc commits are made.

-- 
Joseph S. Myers
joseph@codesourcery.com

Re: glibc am33 and cris architectures

[Mark Salter]

On Mon, 2012-03-26 at 17:09 +0000, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
> On Fri, 16 Mar 2012, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> 
> > I've long been out of touch WRT am33, but I finally brought this up
> > within Red Hat folks that are involved with it.
> > 
> > Mark Salter volunteered to contribute the updates he'd worked on, but
> > that had failed to be contributed because I failed to review the TLS
> > support patches for GCC and binutils (sorry)
> > 
> > So, instead of removing the port, I suggest we name Mark maintainer of
> > the am33 port.  Any objections?
> 
> I haven't seen any objections; obviously some pretty large patches will be 
> needed to bring the port up to date, replace the Linuxthreads port by an 
> NPTL port and generally update sysdeps files for several years of libc 
> changes that involve all-targets updates, so they are in sync with the 
> libc versions again.  And then he'll need to keep a watch on libc commits 
> for any that require am33 updates to keep am33 in sync, and make such 
> updates to the port as and when such libc commits are made.
> 

I have patches which add NPTL to glibc 2.9 and I'm in the process of
bringing those forward to the devel head. And yes, going forward I
intend to keep an eye on the glibc devel and add am33 glibc to the
things I regularly build and test.

--Mark

Re: glibc am33 and cris architectures

[Joseph S. Myers]

On Tue, 27 Mar 2012, Mark Salter wrote:

> I have patches which add NPTL to glibc 2.9 and I'm in the process of
> bringing those forward to the devel head. And yes, going forward I
> intend to keep an eye on the glibc devel and add am33 glibc to the
> things I regularly build and test.

Any news on this update of the am33 port ...?

-- 
Joseph S. Myers
joseph@codesourcery.com

Re: glibc am33 and cris architectures

[Mark Salter]

On Mon, 2012-05-21 at 23:30 +0000, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
> On Tue, 27 Mar 2012, Mark Salter wrote:
> 
> > I have patches which add NPTL to glibc 2.9 and I'm in the process of
> > bringing those forward to the devel head. And yes, going forward I
> > intend to keep an eye on the glibc devel and add am33 glibc to the
> > things I regularly build and test.
> 
> Any news on this update of the am33 port ...?

I've been making slow progress, but expect the am33 patches to hit the
list within the next week or two.