[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87ef0mr6qj.fsf@oldenburg2.str.redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2019 21:08:20 +0200
From: Florian Weimer <fweimer@...hat.com>
To: Carlos O'Donell <carlos@...hat.com>
Cc: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
Joseph Myers <joseph@...esourcery.com>,
Szabolcs Nagy <szabolcs.nagy@....com>,
libc-alpha@...rceware.org, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ben Maurer <bmaurer@...com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
Dave Watson <davejwatson@...com>, Paul Turner <pjt@...gle.com>,
Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-api@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH glibc 2.31 1/5] glibc: Perform rseq(2) registration at C startup and thread creation (v12)
* Carlos O'Donell:
> It would be easier to merge the patch set if it were just an unconditional
> registration like we do for set_robust_list().
Note that this depends on the in-tree system call numbers list, which I
still need to finish according to Joseph's specifications.
(We have something that should work for us as long as we can get large
machines from the lab, but I agree that it's not very useful if glibc
bot-cycle time is roughly one business day.)
Thanks,
Florian
Powered by blists - more mailing lists