This is the mail archive of the 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 5/8] Move i486/pthread_spin_trylock.S to pthread_spin_trylock.S

> Could you instead please try to replace the custom asm implementation
> with a C implementation, preferably the generic one in
> nptl/pthread_spin_trylock.c?  And, if necessary, and improve the latter
> if there is a significant performance difference for uncontended locks?

As I just said in another thread, meaningful changes such as that should
not be conflated with the mechanical directory restructuring HJ is doing
now.  Of course, doing removals first reduces the number of renamings
required.  But the directory restructuring is entirely mechanical and so
its review can consist of verifying that nothing materially changed in the
build whatsoever.  Meaningful changes require meaningful review.

Directory restructuring changes, when generally desireable, should never be
gated on unrelated meaningful changes.  So if HJ wants to do those
meaningful improvements first, that's fine.  But nobody should be objecting
to the directory restructuring changes on the grounds that some other
meaningful change is also desireable.

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