This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: Correct robust mutex / PI futex kernel assumptions (bug 9894)
- From: "Joseph S. Myers" <joseph at codesourcery dot com>
- To: David Miller <davem at davemloft dot net>
- Cc: <libc-alpha at sourceware dot org>, <schwab at linux-m68k dot org>, <david dot holsgrove at xilinx dot com>, <aurel32 at debian dot org>
- Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2014 12:19:12 +0000
- Subject: Re: Correct robust mutex / PI futex kernel assumptions (bug 9894)
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <Pine dot LNX dot 4 dot 64 dot 1403242138500 dot 1129 at digraph dot polyomino dot org dot uk> <20140324 dot 182625 dot 1276142019211722152 dot davem at davemloft dot net> <Pine dot LNX dot 4 dot 64 dot 1403250019020 dot 1129 at digraph dot polyomino dot org dot uk> <20140325 dot 003012 dot 76042767860370362 dot davem at davemloft dot net>
On Tue, 25 Mar 2014, David Miller wrote:
> > and futex_32.h just uses the asm-generic version, which just returns
> > -ENOSYS. Are you saying that if glibc is built for 32-bit plus V9/V8plus,
> > then the kernel that glibc binary runs under must have been built with
> > defined(__sparc__) && defined(__arch64__) true? If so, what is the
> > relevant cpp condition in userspace for "glibc can assume a kernel with
> > functional futex_atomic_cmpxchg_inatomic"?
>
> A 32-bit binary compiled for v9 can only execute on 64-bit kernels.
Thanks for the explanation. What's the right preprocessor conditional for
requiring a 64-bit kernel (to replace the "defined __arch64__" in my
patch)?
--
Joseph S. Myers
joseph@codesourcery.com