[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <8736h2r4fj.fsf@oldenburg2.str.redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2019 21:58:08 +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)
* Florian Weimer:
> * Carlos O'Donell:
>
>> On 9/11/19 3:08 PM, Florian Weimer wrote:
>>> * 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.
>>
>> Which work is this? Do you have a URL reference to WIP?
>
> <https://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/2019-05/msg00630.html>
> <https://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/2019-06/msg00015.html>
Sorry, there was also this:
<https://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/2019-05/msg00629.html>
I also posted a build-many-glibcs.py patch at some point with an
automatic table update, but that still had the massive bot-cycle time.
My current line of thinking is to implement some --use-compilers flag,
so that you can build a fresh glibc checkout against an old, pre-built
compilers for the system call tables update, and then use the patched
glibc sources for one (and hopefully final) bot-cycle.
Thanks,
Florian
Powered by blists - more mailing lists