From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from baldric (baldric.uwo.ca [129.100.10.225]) by dsl2.external.hp.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C800B4830 for ; Mon, 1 Sep 2003 00:07:15 -0600 (MDT) Date: Mon, 1 Sep 2003 02:05:40 -0400 From: Carlos O'Donell To: John David Anglin Cc: randolph@tausq.org, dave.anglin@nrc-cnrc.gc.ca, parisc-linux@lists.parisc-linux.org Subject: Re: [parisc-linux] Re: [glibc] tststatic failues, reduced to simp le testcase. Message-ID: <20030901060540.GA19107@systemhalted> References: <20030831202203.GN5194@systemhalted> <200308312047.QAA05245@hiauly3.hia.nrc.ca> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <200308312047.QAA05245@hiauly3.hia.nrc.ca> Sender: parisc-linux-admin@lists.parisc-linux.org Errors-To: parisc-linux-admin@lists.parisc-linux.org List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: parisc-linux developers list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: On Sun, Aug 31, 2003 at 04:47:59PM -0400, John David Anglin wrote: > > That seems best. The sad fact though is that until I bump > > min_kernel_version in glibc past the kernel version that last didn't > > have this fix, I'm still forced to implement all this for people with > > older kernels. > > Why? Things are broken now and people have lived with the bug for > sometime. While it is possible to work around the problem in userspace, > the best fix is to do it in the kernel. I wouldn't fix anything but > a regression. It's best to use an example. Debian supports HPPA as an architecture. I provide Debian with patches to make upstream glibc cvs buildable for this distribution. If I make all the glibc fixes in the kernel, and submit to debian minimal patches, glibc will build and subsequent updates will render all userspace broken. As a happy medium I need to make, atleast for all usable distributions, a set of patches that fix it in such a way that we don't force a kernel update (people don't like to update their kernel). The patches I send upstream will be different. They will, to the best of my ability, be as clean as possible. I balance users on one side, and the "right thing" on the other. I agree, that the kernel, sharing the context switch path, and already saving r19 should be held responsible for restoring r19. I've already begun to run into a number of cases where userspace restores aren't going so well. c.