Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2007 16:16:00 +0100 From: Alexander Leidinger <Alexander@Leidinger.net> To: Divacky Roman <xdivac02@stud.fit.vutbr.cz> Cc: emulation@freebsd.org, rdivacky@freebsd.org, kib@freebsd.org, jkim@freebsd.org Subject: Re: 2.6.16 for linuxulator & 7.0 release Message-ID: <20070316161600.4r0gg5jk2sc4wwwo@webmail.leidinger.net> In-Reply-To: <20070316122658.GA31977@stud.fit.vutbr.cz> References: <20070316120038.2iizia24mc4wcw8s@webmail.leidinger.net> <20070316122658.GA31977@stud.fit.vutbr.cz>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Quoting Divacky Roman <xdivac02@stud.fit.vutbr.cz> (from Fri, 16 Mar =20 2007 13:26:58 +0100): > On Fri, Mar 16, 2007 at 12:00:38PM +0100, Alexander Leidinger wrote: >> In p4 we have the futex/TLS stuff for amd64 but because of the futexes >> not completely right part it is not committed to current yet. As we >> already have the futex and TLS stuff for i386 on a similar level in >> current, I would say we should go ahead and sync the amd64 stuff. It >> is not used by default, so we don't break existing linux stuff and we >> get the benefit of more people being able to have a look at it and >> play with it. So what are your opinions, shall we give jkim@ the green >> light to MFp4 the futex/TLS stuff? > > futexes are broken... I just recieved a report that oracle installer > hangs on amd64/SMP waiting on a lock. The TLS@amd64 looks good though > > I dont see any harm in commiting futexes/TLS for amd64 - go for it kim! > > I'd like to see the linux-aio commited as well before 7.0R I did not had time to have a look at it. I don't know when I get time. >> Regarding the futexes not being completely right and the epoll stuff: >> I think it needs to be done now, not in a month or two, else we don't >> have enough time to let people play with this before the release of >> 7.0. Anyone with a little bit of time at hand out there? We need a >> specification what the futexes are supposed to do (so far we didn't >> find a good description, and the linux code is hard to read and >> doesn't not really tell what it is _supposed_ to do) and we need >> people which compare the current code we have with this specification. >> Finding a regression test for futexes would also be nice. > > I plan to apply for SoC this year with a plan to implement epoll/inotify > interface + "finish" the linux26 stuff... if I get elected I guess things > will move forward fast :) I definitely plan to look at the futexes (we hav= e > a testing program so its not that hard) I will not have time to mentor this year. I intent to participate in =20 the application voting process only. I don't know if another committer =20 is willing to mentor a linuxulator project in the SoC. Bye, Alexander. --=20 "No job too big; no fee too big!" =09=09-- Dr. Peter Venkman, "Ghost-busters" http://www.Leidinger.net Alexander @ Leidinger.net: PGP ID =3D B0063FE7 http://www.FreeBSD.org netchild @ FreeBSD.org : PGP ID =3D 72077137
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20070316161600.4r0gg5jk2sc4wwwo>