Hi, we (ISC) have no intention of using signal based URCU in BIND 9. Our plan relies on using the QSBR flavor as BIND 9 is internally event-loop based with natural quiescent states.
Ondrej -- Ondřej Surý <ond...@sury.org> (He/Him) > On 10. 5. 2023, at 23:10, Olivier Dion via lttng-dev > <lttng-dev@lists.lttng.org> wrote: > > Hi all, > > We have the intention of deprecating the urcu-signal flavor in the > future. We are asking users of URCU for _feedback_ on this before > going any further. > > Part of this decision is that we are adding support for TSAN in URCU and > the signal flavor deadlocks with TSAN. It is also my understanding that > the urcu-signal flavor was historically made as a fallback for system > lacking the membarrier(2) system call. Nowadays, most systems have > support for that system call, making the urcu-signal an artifact of the > past. > > The following is a proposed timeline of events: > > 1. Asking for feedback from users of URCU (this message) > 2. Disabling the signal flavor by default and adding --enable-flavor-signal > 3. Removing the signal flavor > > -- > Olivier Dion > EfficiOS Inc. > https://www.efficios.com > > _______________________________________________ > lttng-dev mailing list > lttng-dev@lists.lttng.org > https://lists.lttng.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lttng-dev _______________________________________________ lttng-dev mailing list lttng-dev@lists.lttng.org https://lists.lttng.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lttng-dev
