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] Fix Linux fcntl OFD locks for non-LFS architectures (BZ#20251)

From: Adhemerval Zanella <adhemerval dot zanella at linaro dot org>
To: Joseph Myers <joseph at codesourcery dot com>
Cc: Florian Weimer <fweimer at redhat dot com>, libc-alpha at sourceware dot org
Date: Fri, 1 Jun 2018 18:49:16 -0300
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix Linux fcntl OFD locks for non-LFS architectures (BZ#20251)
References: <1522877210-27934-1-git-send-email-adhemerval.zanella@linaro.org> <36d1d0db-8661-5476-7e42-1a7015f4c766@redhat.com> <b4364cd6-0416-0665-aafb-09345b3f00af@linaro.org> <alpine.DEB.2.20.1806012049040.25633@digraph.polyomino.org.uk>


On 01/06/2018 17:50, Joseph Myers wrote:
> On Fri, 1 Jun 2018, Adhemerval Zanella wrote:
> 
>> It is not really new, since for architectures with default LFS support this is
>> transparent and for architectures with non-default LFS my understanding is 
>> functions with *64 suffix are expected to handle cancellation as the non-LFS.
> 
> *64 functions are generally expected to be analogous with the 
> corresponding non-LFS functions, yes.  I think the new fcntl64 API still 
> merits a specific NEWS entry, just like other new function APIs.
> 

Alright, I will add a NEWS entry.

References:
- Re: [PATCH] Fix Linux fcntl OFD locks for non-LFS architectures (BZ#20251)
  - From: Florian Weimer
- Re: [PATCH] Fix Linux fcntl OFD locks for non-LFS architectures (BZ#20251)
  - From: Adhemerval Zanella
- Re: [PATCH] Fix Linux fcntl OFD locks for non-LFS architectures (BZ#20251)
  - From: Joseph Myers

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