Re: [PATCH] Remove hppa lowlevellock.c

[Bernard Ogden <bernie dot ogden at linaro dot org>]

I've completed failed to ping this - sorry.

Would you mind committing?

Thanks,

Bernie

On 29 Apr 2014, at 10:14, Carlos O'Donell <carlos@redhat.com> wrote:

> On 04/28/2014 11:51 AM, Bernie Ogden wrote:
>> lowlevellock.c for hppa differs from the generic lowlevellock.c only in
>> insignificant ways, so can be removed. I don't have any hppa targets
>> to work with, so have not been able to test this patch.
>> 
>> The notable differences between the hppa and generic implementations are:
>> 
>> 1) Some functions in hppa's lowlevellock.c set futex to 2 if it was 1.
>> The generic version always sets the futex to 2. As futex can only be
>> 0, 1 or 2 on entry into these functions, the behaviour is equivalent.
>> (If the futex manages to be 0 on entry then we've just lost an
>> unlikely fast path out.)
>> 2) hppa places most of the functions in this file in both libc and
>> libpthread. The generic implementation places only
>> __lll_lock_wait_private in libc. As these are internal functions I
>> think that, if this does cause a problem, it would show up at build
>> time - but I'm new to glibc so prepared to be corrected (and have not
>> been able to build).
>> 
>> I would be grateful if the maintainer could test/comment.
>> 
>> Regards,
>> 
>> Bernie
>> 
>> ports/ChangeLog.hppa
>> 2014-04-24  Bernard Ogden  <bernie.ogden@linaro.org>
>> 
>> [BZ #15119]
>> * ports/sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/hppa/nptl/lowlevellock.c: Remove file.
> 
> Looks good to me.
> 
> hppa's futex implementation should match the generic defaults at all times.
> 
> Cheers,
> Carlos.
>