This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: [PATCH 00/10] nptl: Fix Race conditions in pthread cancellation (BZ#12683)
- From: Joseph Myers <joseph at codesourcery dot com>
- To: Adhemerval Zanella <adhemerval dot zanella at linaro dot org>
- Cc: GNU C Library <libc-alpha at sourceware dot org>
- Date: Thu, 17 Sep 2015 21:07:13 +0000
- Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/10] nptl: Fix Race conditions in pthread cancellation (BZ#12683)
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <55FB1CA0 dot 2 at linaro dot org> <alpine dot DEB dot 2 dot 10 dot 1509172032090 dot 2455 at digraph dot polyomino dot org dot uk>
On Thu, 17 Sep 2015, Joseph Myers wrote:
> Do you mean INLINE_SYSCALL (setting errno, returning -1 on error) or
> INTERNAL_SYSCALL? If INTERNAL_SYSCALL, what exactly are the semantics for
> architectures such as MIPS that use two registers for returns (with a
> separate register for an error flag, and the normal return register having
> the non-negated syscall number in that case)? I didn't spot any such
> architectures in the examples you'd already converted - if I missed any,
> it would be helpful for your instructions for architecture maintainers to
> point explicitly to the already-converted architectures that provide the
> most generic examples for each of the two syscall return conventions.
On further investigation, it seems powerpc is such an architecture you've
already converted (but the accurate documentation of semantics, with
pointers to the most generic examples, is still definitely needed). But
the patch division is really confusing. Patch 2 says "powerpc64", but it
actually includes loads of architecture-independent changes. Patch 6 says
"ppc32", but it actually includes an i386 change. To the extent that the
patches will all go in one commit anyway, could you use a division into
patches that more logically reflects the different parts of the change.
(To the extent that patches can go in separate commits - Phil Blundell's
new tests come to mind, unless there's some reason they depend on other
changes - they should be posted and reviewed separately so they can go in
before the rest of the patch series.)
--
Joseph S. Myers
joseph@codesourcery.com