This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: [PATCH] Don't rely on having LP64 in semaphores if 64b atomic ops are available.
- From: "H.J. Lu" <hjl dot tools at gmail dot com>
- To: Torvald Riegel <triegel at redhat dot com>
- Cc: GLIBC Devel <libc-alpha at sourceware dot org>, Steve Ellcey <sellcey at mips dot com>, "Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro at linux-mips dot org>
- Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2015 10:29:44 -0800
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] Don't rely on having LP64 in semaphores if 64b atomic ops are available.
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <1421951065 dot 4572 dot 47 dot camel at triegel dot csb>
On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 10:24 AM, Torvald Riegel <triegel@redhat.com> wrote:
> This attempts to fix an issue in the new semaphore implementation for
> archs that provide 64b atomic ops but do not use an LP64 data model.
> This affects MIPS N32 ABI and x32 too I guess.
>
> Steve, can you test this patch please? I'll do the same on x86_64-linux
> in the meantime.
>
> Also, do we already have any information on which data models we
> support? I reckon LP64 and ILP32?, or others as well? I'd like to add
> a comment to atomic.h, and if we have such information already, I'd just
> point to it.
>
>
> 2015-01-22 Torvald Riegel <triegel@redhat.com>
>
> * nptl/sem_post.c (__new_sem_post): Don't rely on an LP64 data model.
> * nptl/sem_waitcommon.c (__sem_wait_cleanup, __new_sem_wait_fast,
> __new_sem_wait_slow): Likewise.
> * sysdeps/nptl/internaltypes.h (struct new_sem): Likewise.
Do we really need int64 for the "data" field internally?
--
H.J.