This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: Support for Intel X1000
- From: Florian Weimer <fweimer at redhat dot com>
- To: "Kinsella, Ray" <ray dot kinsella at intel dot com>, "libc-alpha at sourceware dot org" <libc-alpha at sourceware dot org>
- Cc: "carlos at redhat dot com" <carlos at redhat dot com>
- Date: Tue, 12 May 2015 16:38:04 +0200
- Subject: Re: Support for Intel X1000
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <1431426490 dot 3246 dot 29 dot camel at intel dot com>
On 05/12/2015 12:28 PM, Kinsella, Ray wrote:
> 1. Not using the LOCK prefix on the Intel X1000. This can be achieved
> either by defining UP (uniprocessor) or telling the assembler to omit
> the LOCK prefix "momit-lock-prefix=yes".
We might have places where the instruction layout matters (not sure
about that). It might not be as simple as flipping a compiler switch.
> 2. OS builders creating a UP version of glibc targeted for the X1000.
> The runtime linker then decides which glibc to load based on a HWCAP,
> in a similar way to how the Xen specific glibc is loaded.
I think the two cases are not really comparable. Back in those days,
access to thread-local variables was pretty rare and mostly restricted
to glibc.
Nowadays, you'd have to recompile a whole distribution to get rid of
atomics everywhere, and I can't really see any of the major
distributions doing that.
--
Florian Weimer / Red Hat Product Security