This is the mail archive of the libc-alpha@sourceware.org mailing list for the glibc project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: [PATCH] sh: Use generic lowlevellock-futex.h.


Torvald Riegel <triegel@redhat.com> wrote:
> This completely untested patch removes the custom definitions of futex
> functions in sh lowlevellock.h, using the generic lowlevellock-futex.h
> instead.  This is part of the clean-up efforts regarding the
> glibc-internal futex API (e.g., adding proper error checking).
> 
> This also removes the sh4 lowlevellock.h, which just requires more
> padding for the syscalls; the same requirement is made by sh4 sysdep.h,
> so INTERNAL_SYSCALL used in the generic lowlevellock-futex.h will honor
> this too.
> 
> This keeps the custom asm for the lock fast paths because I don't know
> whether the generic C implementation would be fine.  If it would be
> (e.g., test with sh's lowlevellock.h removed), then removing the custom
> asm altogether would be even better.
> 
> Is this OK for sh?  If not, do you have an alternative suggestion for
> how to use the generic futex interfaces?

The patch is OK.

I definitely agree with your view about the custom asm.  Switch to
the generic C implementation would be simply fine and the way to go.

Regards,
	kaz


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]