This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: glibc 2.24 --- Starting soft/slush freeze discussion
- From: Adhemerval Zanella <adhemerval dot zanella at linaro dot org>
- To: GNU C Library <libc-alpha at sourceware dot org>
- Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2016 15:43:38 -0300
- Subject: Re: glibc 2.24 --- Starting soft/slush freeze discussion
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <57757DBB dot 2060404 at linaro dot org>
I have updated the 2.24 release wiki with H.J. Lu, Zach Weinberg and mine
updates as blockers and desirables.
I added the 3 bugs appointed by H. J. Lu in releases blockers mainly because
there are potentially build breakers and important ABI fixes (X86-64: Properly
align stack in _dl_tlsdesc_dynamic). I also added Zach's sysmacros as a blocker,
although I do not have a strong opinion about them (I am about to read all the
thread now). I have also add two releases blocker from my side: 1 .Refactor
Linux raise implementation (BZ#15368) and 2. Remove __ASSUME_OFF_DIFF_OFF64 definition.
I have added the 'Check GLIBC_IFUNC to enable/disable ifunc features' in desirables
features mainly from a conservative approach (it was sent late in release cycle,
it is still in review process, it only addresses x86_64). We can move it to
release blocker if there are consensus about it.
On 30/06/2016 17:14, Adhemerval Zanella wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> As stated in a previous messages the idea is to start soft/slushy freeze mode
> tomorrow July 1st. There were some discussion about delay it for a week [1],
> but I see no compelling reasons to do so. As stated by Torvald, the new
> rwlock implementation will take some more days and he also made no promises.
> The tunables is something I think we would like to add, but I think we can
> either drop it again for new release or continue the discussion based on
> IFUNC enable/disable [2].
>
> I will spend some time tomorrow compiling the release blockers for 2.24, so
> please use this thread as placeholder to discuss them. I would like to
> have them defined by the end of tomorrow.
>
> Documentation changes and bug fixes are OK.
>
> [1] https://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/2016-06/msg01214.html
> [2] https://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/2016-06/msg01236.html
> [3] https://sourceware.org/glibc/wiki/Release/2.24
>