[PATCH] [BZ #20985] robust mutexes: Fix broken x86 assembly by removing it

[Torvald Riegel]

On Fri, 2017-01-13 at 11:01 +0100, Florian Weimer wrote:
> On 12/22/2016 12:23 PM, Torvald Riegel wrote:
> > On Thu, 2016-12-22 at 12:06 +0100, Florian Weimer wrote:
> >> On 12/22/2016 11:22 AM, Torvald Riegel wrote:
> >>>     	(LLL_ROBUST_MUTEX_LOCK_MODIFIER): New.
> >>
> >> This needs to be documented in the code.  It seems the code always
> >> defines it as 0, so it's not clear to me why it makes sense to define it
> >> at all (twice even).
> >
> > This should be defined differently when pthread_mutex_cond_lock.c
> > includes the file; I just noticed that it doesn't do that.
> >
> > Is the patch OK besides that (ie, so after fixing that oversight and
> > adding a suitable comment to the definition of
> > LLL_ROBUST_MUTEX_LOCK_MODIFIER?).
> 
> Do we already have a test case which detects the bug you introduced?

The bug I introduced, meaning the oversight in the previous definition?
I don't think we need tests for mistakes that never made it into master.
Additionally, I intend to get rid of the special handling of cond_lock
eventually; it's not necessary anymore because the new condvar doesn't
use futex-requeue.  But that's a change for the next release.

> Would you please post a consolidated patch rebased to current master?

Attached.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: robust-asm.patch
Type: text/x-patch
Size: 48432 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://sourceware.org/pipermail/libc-alpha/attachments/20170113/59f47484/attachment.bin>