Testing glibc 2.24 on remaining machines.

[Torvald Riegel]

On Wed, 2016-07-20 at 15:39 -0700, David Miller wrote:
> From: Carlos O'Donell <carlos@redhat.com>
> Date: Sat, 16 Jul 2016 14:11:27 -0400
> 
> > Are you able to do the sparc and sparc64 testing?
> 
> I did v9 sparc and sparc64 runs and they mostly look fine.

Great, thanks.

What do we do with pre-v9 sparc though?  I believe pthreads barriers
don't work on it currently, and the new condvar and rwlock
implementaitons that we'll hopefully switch to in the next cycle also
wouldn't work on pre-v9 sparc.

Do we want to:
(1) not further support pre-v9 sparc?
(2) not further support all of pthreads on pre-v9 sparc (and potentially
other things in glibc that use rwlocks, IIRC we don't use condvars
internally)?
(3) build something that emulates full C11 atomics, either backed by
locks in the synchronization data structure or a process-global lock
array (though we'd have to adapt the current condvar because there's no
space for an extra lock there)?

We could also continue to adapt each synchronization data structure
specially to pre-v9 sparc, but I don't think this is good enough in
terms of maintainability.  Personally, I also don't have time to work on
(3).