From: Lee Revell <rlrevell@joe-job.com>
To: Jamie Lokier <jamie@shareable.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mingo@elte.hu,
Chris Morgan <cmorgan@alum.wpi.edu>,
paul@linuxaudiosystems.com,
Hidetoshi Seto <seto.hidetoshi@jp.fujitsu.com>
Subject: Re: kernel bug: futex_wait hang
Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2005 18:18:22 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1111533503.4691.8.camel@mindpipe> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20050322153021.GA7223@mail.shareable.org>
On Tue, 2005-03-22 at 15:30 +0000, Jamie Lokier wrote:
> Lee Revell wrote:
> > On Tue, 2005-03-22 at 04:48 +0000, Jamie Lokier wrote:
> > > I argued for fixing Glibc on the grounds that the changed kernel
> > > behaviour, or more exactly having Glibc depend on it, loses a certain
> > > semantic property useful for unusual operations on multiple futexes at
> > > the same time. But I appear to have lost the argument, and Jakub's
> > > latest patch does clean up some cruft quite nicely, with no expected
> > > performance hit.
> >
> > A glibc fix will take forever to get to users compared to a kernel fix.
>
> Interesting perspective. On my systems Glibc is upgraded more often
> than the kernel.
>
Blame the Debian maintainers. This bug, reported August 2004, is still
unfixed even in unstable!!!
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=266507
Apparently they think marking a bug "fixed upstream" does something to
solve the problem.
Lee
prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-03-22 23:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-03-22 3:59 kernel bug: futex_wait hang Lee Revell
2005-03-22 4:20 ` Andrew Morton
2005-03-22 4:25 ` Lee Revell
2005-03-22 4:46 ` Jamie Lokier
2005-03-22 4:48 ` Jamie Lokier
2005-03-22 5:08 ` Andrew Morton
2005-03-22 5:30 ` Lee Revell
2005-03-22 6:34 ` Jakub Jelinek
2005-03-22 23:58 ` Lee Revell
2005-03-23 13:12 ` paul
2005-03-23 13:43 ` Jakub Jelinek
2005-03-22 5:15 ` Lee Revell
2005-03-22 15:30 ` Jamie Lokier
2005-03-22 23:18 ` Lee Revell [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1111533503.4691.8.camel@mindpipe \
--to=rlrevell@joe-job.com \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=cmorgan@alum.wpi.edu \
--cc=jamie@shareable.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=paul@linuxaudiosystems.com \
--cc=seto.hidetoshi@jp.fujitsu.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox