This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: [PATCH 0/6][BZ #11588] pi-condvars: add priority inheritance for pthread_cond_* internal lock
- From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck at linux dot vnet dot ibm dot com>
- To: Gratian Crisan <gratian dot crisan at ni dot com>
- Cc: "Carlos O'Donell" <carlos at redhat dot com>, Darren Hart <dvhart at linux dot intel dot com>, gratian at gmail dot com, Joseph Myers <joseph at codesourcery dot com>, Jeff Law <law at redhat dot com>, libc-alpha at sourceware dot org, Scot Salmon <scot dot salmon at ni dot com>, Siddhesh Poyarekar <spoyarek at redhat dot com>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx at linutronix dot de>, Torvald Riegel <triegel at redhat dot com>, Clark Williams <williams at redhat dot com>
- Date: Wed, 9 Jul 2014 09:05:53 -0700
- Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/6][BZ #11588] pi-condvars: add priority inheritance for pthread_cond_* internal lock
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <OF6ABEE614 dot FAE80AD2-ON86257D0E dot 006B38F4-86257D0E dot 0070034A at ni dot com> <20140709141649 dot GA10496 at linux dot vnet dot ibm dot com> <OF3B505349 dot 3CC20F3E-ON86257D10 dot 0054D160-86257D10 dot 0057A920 at ni dot com>
- Reply-to: paulmck at linux dot vnet dot ibm dot com
On Wed, Jul 09, 2014 at 10:57:27AM -0500, Gratian Crisan wrote:
> "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote on 07/09/2014
> 09:16:49 AM:
>
> > Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/6][BZ #11588] pi-condvars: add priority
> > inheritance for pthread_cond_* internal lock
> >
> > On Mon, Jul 07, 2014 at 03:23:27PM -0500, Gratian Crisan wrote:
> > > Re-submitting an updated version of the series of patches Darren Hart
> > > posted
> > > back in 2010. The basic problem they're addressing is the fact that
> the
> > > pthread_cond* calls can cause an unbounded priority inversion,
> described
> > > in
> > > BZ #11588.
> > >
> > > It took a while but the copyright assignments should all be sorted out
>
> > > now.
> > > Paul E. McKenny submitted the assignment on behalf of IBM and one was
> > > signed/submitted by relevant parties at National Instruments and FSF.
> >
> > That did take some time, didn't it?
>
> No kidding.
>
> > OK, please help me out here... Exactly which patches did you need me
> > to send out to exactly which email addresses?
> >
> > Thanx, Paul
> >
>
> Here's my understanding of the situation (please correct me if I'm wrong):
>
> - Original patches were submitted to the libc-alpha mailing list by
> Darren back in May 2010 (see
> https://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/2010-05/msg00055.html and
> follow-ups). They can also be found under the "Show Obsolete" link for
> attachments in bugzilla (V2):
> https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11588
>
> - At the end of last year (November/2013?) you've submitted a copyright
> assignment on behalf of IBM for those patches.
>
> - A copyright assignment was submitted on behalf of National Instruments
> for the changes I've made and signed by relevant parties in March 2014
> (RMS for FSF and our VP of R&D for NI).
>
> - I have ported the original patch "[PATCH 1/6][BZ #11588] pi-condvars:
> add protocol support to pthread_condattr_t" to glibc 2.19 and now 2.20 and
> added the patches 4/6, 5/6, 6/6 in the latest submission.
>
> I guess the question is do the original IBM patches need to be
> re-submitted to libc-alpha@sourceware.org in order to fulfill the
> copyright assignment requirements or is the original submission by Daren
> (linked above) sufficient? Hopefully somebody on the libc-alpha list can
> provide some guidance here.
I am OK with the concept of the retroactive copyright assignment. ;-)
> Also we need somebody with access to confirm that the copyright.list was
> updated with the assignments.
Ah, hopefully that catches up quickly.
Thanx, Paul