Re: [PATCH] parisc: futex: Use same lock set as lws calls

[Domenico Andreoli <cavok@debian.org>]

On Mon, Oct 17, 2011 at 05:09:05PM -0400, John David Anglin wrote:
> 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

http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=617973

cheers,
Domenico