From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <marcelo.tosatti@cyclades.com>
Received: from parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk
	(parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk [195.92.249.252])
	(using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
	(Client did not present a certificate)
	by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D01CD67B91
	for <linuxppc-embedded@ozlabs.org>;
	Sat,  2 Jul 2005 05:36:08 +1000 (EST)
Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2005 11:42:23 -0300
From: Marcelo Tosatti <marcelo.tosatti@cyclades.com>
To: Jason McMullan <jason.mcmullan@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20050701144223.GB11975@logos.cnet>
References: <42C1AAC1.4060702@gmail.com> <20050629085913.GA2153@logos.cnet>
	<faba7798050630071347d4ad63@mail.gmail.com>
	<20050701094438.GA11121@logos.cnet>
	<1120229717.21507.9.camel@jmcmullan.timesys>
	<20050701101713.GC11121@logos.cnet>
	<1120244191.18872.3.camel@jmcmullan.timesys>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
In-Reply-To: <1120244191.18872.3.camel@jmcmullan.timesys>
Cc: Anton =?iso-8859-1?Q?W=F6llert?= <a.woellert@gmail.com>,
	linux-ppc-embedded <linuxppc-embedded@ozlabs.org>
Subject: Re: mpc8xx and ld.so problem
List-Id: Linux on Embedded PowerPC Developers Mail List
	<linuxppc-embedded.ozlabs.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-embedded>,
	<mailto:linuxppc-embedded-request@ozlabs.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://ozlabs.org/pipermail/linuxppc-embedded>
List-Post: <mailto:linuxppc-embedded@ozlabs.org>
List-Help: <mailto:linuxppc-embedded-request@ozlabs.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-embedded>,
	<mailto:linuxppc-embedded-request@ozlabs.org?subject=subscribe>

On Fri, Jul 01, 2005 at 02:56:30PM -0400, Jason McMullan wrote:
> On Fri, 2005-07-01 at 07:17 -0300, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
> > That was a quick response - thanks.
> > 
> > Two questions:
> > 
> > - Do you happen to know about details of dcbz's (mis)behaviour on 8xx? 
> > 
> > I ask that mainly because I worry about in-kernel dcbz users.
> 
>     IIRC, it isn't used in any 8xx code paths.

OK!

> > - Shouldnt upstream glibc have that fixed for 8xx by now?
> 
>     Ha. Funny. The glibc powerpc maintainer doesn't want any embedded
> fixes in the mainline. 

Who is that?

> Last I checked, that was for 'the tools vendors' to fix.

Silly - so embedded developers are supposed rely on "embedded vendors"
and not on the mainstream software distributions? 

>     "We won't work around processor bugs" is their philosophy.
>
>     I went through a similar (unsuccessful) battle with the
> amcc 440ep's "blrl" errata and gcc/glibc.
> 
>     It would be nice if the politics there have changed
> (maybe they just didn't like me personally), but I don't have
> much hope.

If enough people complain they will, hopefully, listen.