From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: John David Anglin Subject: Re: [PATCH] parisc: futex: Use same lock set as lws calls Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2011 17:09:05 -0400 Message-ID: <4E9C9971.5090806@bell.net> References: <20111009204010.GA22374@hiauly1.hia.nrc.ca> <20111017152358.GA3518@glitch> <4E9C6F9E.5000605@bell.net> <4E9C9643.6030309@systemhalted.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Cc: debian-hppa@lists.debian.org, linux-parisc To: Carlos O'Donell Return-path: In-Reply-To: <4E9C9643.6030309@systemhalted.org> List-ID: List-Id: linux-parisc.vger.kernel.org On 10/17/2011 4:55 PM, Carlos O'Donell wrote: > On 10/17/2011 2:10 PM, John David Anglin wrote: >> > On 10/17/2011 11:47 AM, Carlos O'Donell wrote: >>> >> The test-fork1 failure is still unexplained and happens intermittently. >> > >> > I have built a lot of unstable on my rp3440. I think this one causes failures in the thread >> > testsuites of perl, python2.7 and glib2.0. These are characterized by tests hanging. >> > >> > There is another class of failures. They typically cause my rp3440 to crash due >> > to cache corruption. The GCC libgomp and libatomic-ops testsuite seem to trigger >> > this one. As I have mentioned, it's the libgomp "for" tests that >>> >> >>> >> The cancellation issues happen in tst-cancel*. >>> >> >>> >> I believe the cancellation issues are toolchain issues and I need to >>> >> look into them. >> > Possibly, this is related to the following bug that I found last week building mpfr-3.1.0: >> > http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50691 >> > A call to __tls_get_addr clobbers first argument of call to mpfr_cache. Don't have a >> > fix at the moment, but there is a simple testcase. >> > >> > On a different subject, I tried to get udev-172-1 working. However, this breaks bootstrap >> > due to an invalid argument in a call to inotify_init. It's somewhat timing dependent since >> > some kernels will boot if they build enough of /dev before udev messes up. In any case, >> > I believe that Guy Martin posted a patch a year or so ago to correct an inconsistency >> > between the glibc and the kernel for some bit definitions. I'm thinking this may fix the >> > udev problem. > What patch is this? I don't remember it. URL? > http://www.cygwin.com/ml/libc-ports/2010-08/msg00001.html Dave -- John David Anglin dave.anglin@bell.net