Re: [PATCH] powerpc: New feature - HWCAP/HWCAP2 bits in the TCB

[David Edelsohn <dje dot gcc at gmail dot com>]

On Tue, 2015-06-30 at 18:01 +0200, Torvald Riegel wrote:

> I don't think we promise to do everything for everyone.  That does not
> conflict with free software.

The request is not "do everything for everyone".  That is a strawman argument.

The issue is: should the GLIBC community and leaders use their
position to pick favorites for architectures and ABIs.  If the GLIBC
community wants to say that GLIBC features and architecture and
framework will be designed for the most prevalent, commodity
architecture and ABI (Intel x86-64) and all other architectures can
live on the table scraps when the benevolent dictators magnanimously
choose to throw them a bone, that's fine as long as it is explicit.

The proposal is not a request to restructure core, common parts of
GLIBC in badly designed ways.  The proposal is not advocating use of
this feature in this programming style as exemplary.  It's a
least-bad, target-specific patch to deal with a performance problem of
real-world, customer code seen in the field.

Admonishing IBM that it should lecture customers on how to write their
code or essentially declaring that the idioms adopted by most
programmers because of Intel x86 prevalence are somehow preferred as
if they were handed down on silver tablets is arrogant and naive.

If you make your garden too exclusive, don't be surprised when people
plant alternative gardens.

- David