This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/2] Make sparcv8 work again on cas enabled hardware
- From: Adhemerval Zanella <adhemerval dot zanella at linaro dot org>
- To: David Miller <davem at davemloft dot net>, triegel at redhat dot com
- Cc: andreas at gaisler dot com, libc-alpha at sourceware dot org, carlos at redhat dot com, software at gaisler dot com
- Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2016 16:41:13 -0200
- Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/2] Make sparcv8 work again on cas enabled hardware
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <email@example.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <email@example.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org>
On 03/11/2016 15:22, David Miller wrote:
> From: Torvald Riegel <email@example.com>
> Date: Thu, 03 Nov 2016 16:39:21 +0100
>> Is there any difference between the additional CAS on a v8 and the CAS
>> on a v9? If there should be none (eg, same instruciton encoding etc.),
>> we wouldn't need a runtime check for this, would we?
> A quick look at binutils shows that the encoding appears to be the same.
>> That depends on whether we want to support sparc HW that does have a
>> CAS. It's still not clear to me whether this is a goal, and if it's a
>> goal, whether it's a goal for today or for some time in the future.
> I think there is value in supporting pure-v8, however painful it may
> I personally don't like to see when we drop support for old systems on
> the floor just because it's too inconvenient or cumbersome to keep
> them working properly.
In fact I see it should be one of the main reason for dropping support
for old system. At least for current topic, it means add complete
separate implementation for only one arch, where current work is
aimed exactly to avoid it. It is more code to audit/test on very
specific environments and adds more complexity while fixing the
default implementation (should the patch touch as well the arch
specific parts or just let it broke?).