| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Mark Salter <msalter(at)redhat(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Pavel Raiskup <praiskup(at)redhat(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH] Add support for TAS/S_UNLOCK for aarch64 |
| Date: | 2013-06-04 19:45:26 |
| Message-ID: | 3101.1370375126@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
I wrote:
> Mark Salter <msalter(at)redhat(dot)com> writes:
>> On Tue, 2013-06-04 at 13:40 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> We got no response to the question of whether it couldn't be merged with
>>> the existing ARM32 code block. I'd prefer not to have essentially
>>> duplicate sections in s_lock.h if it's not necessary.
>> Of course it could be. I don't think it should be. Aarch64 is a
>> completely new architecture with faint resemblance to 32bit arm.
> OK, fair enough.
Applied in HEAD and 9.2. If there's demand, we could patch further
back, but we don't have aarch64 in config.guess/config.sub before 9.2,
so we'd have to change that too. Given that aarch64 is barely past the
vaporware stage, I'm not sure there's demand to install back-rev
Postgres on it.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2013-06-04 20:07:23 | Re: Configurable location for extension .control files |
| Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2013-06-04 19:17:05 | Re: Configurable location for extension .control files |