[PATCH] Remove arm lowlevellock.c

Bernie Ogden bernie.ogden@linaro.org
Thu May 1 13:03:00 GMT 2014


Raised BZ 16892 for the lowlevellock.h issues.

Thanks for the pointer.

On 30 April 2014 16:49, Joseph S. Myers <joseph@codesourcery.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 30 Apr 2014, Bernie Ogden wrote:
>
>> The workaround is that some of the arm lowlevellock.c functions
>> promote futex to 2 if it is 1. Generic lowlevellock.c always promotes
>> futex to 2. Hence, removing arm's lowlevellock.c doesn't cause a
>> regression in this sense.
>
> Thanks.  The original patch is OK.
>
>> I agree with you on unifying lowlevellock.h - so it'll take a little
>> longer for me to submit the fix for the second bug as I'll stop to
>> unify the files as part of the work. (Quite a few of them do look
>> unifiable.)
>
> FWIW there are two main different styles of syscall error handling in the
> files, but I don't know if that's in any way a necessary difference; at
> least it shouldn't require duplicating the whole file.  (Compare the ARM
> and MIPS versions of lll_futex_timed_wait, for example.)
>
> --
> Joseph S. Myers
> joseph@codesourcery.com



More information about the Libc-ports mailing list