This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: [PATCH] Fix __lll_timedlock_wait busy-wait issue
- From: Maxim Kuvyrkov <maxim dot kuvyrkov at linaro dot org>
- To: "Joseph S. Myers" <joseph at codesourcery dot com>
- Cc: Will Newton <will dot newton at linaro dot org>, bniebuhr at efjohnson dot com, uclibc at uclibc dot org, "libc-ports at sourceware dot org" <libc-ports at sourceware dot org>, libc-alpha <libc-alpha at sourceware dot org>
- Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2014 11:13:54 +1300
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix __lll_timedlock_wait busy-wait issue
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <1395409800-4457-1-git-send-email-bniebuhr at efjohnson dot com> <09F962CB-595F-4FAB-9435-52C237DB402C at linaro dot org> <CANu=Dmhn-a-PUNA88OfpoAQyvUZGd3UH+LB+cf=fLWyUNyyU+A at mail dot gmail dot com> <Pine dot LNX dot 4 dot 64 dot 1403272157560 dot 25264 at digraph dot polyomino dot org dot uk>
On Mar 28, 2014, at 11:01 AM, Joseph S. Myers <joseph@codesourcery.com> wrote:
> I don't know how this might relate to
> <https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15119> (see
> <https://sourceware.org/ml/libc-ports/2013-01/msg00084.html> and
> <https://sourceware.org/ml/libc-ports/2013-02/msg00021.html> and the rest
> of that thread). But my preference for how to address this is definitely
> to move to unifying lowlevellock.[ch] files across as many architectures
> as possible - which requires someone to understand the differences and
> produce a careful analysis that shows what the best form for generic files
> is and what cases actually require architecture-specific files to override
> those generic files (preferably overriding only the bits that need
> overriding).
Yeap, it's the same issue in the PR and same solution as in this thread. Unfortunately, the previous discussion veered off towards sparc away from ARM and got forgotten.
I agree that unifying lowlevellock.c implementation is the way forward. At the very least I will make sure that ARM doesn't have unnecessary divergence from generic lowlevellock.
Thank you,
--
Maxim Kuvyrkov
www.linaro.org