Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Add support for TAS/S_UNLOCK for aarch64

2013-06-04 Thread Tom Lane
I wrote: > Mark Salter 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

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Add support for TAS/S_UNLOCK for aarch64

2013-06-04 Thread Tom Lane
Mark Salter 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

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Add support for TAS/S_UNLOCK for aarch64

2013-06-04 Thread Mark Salter
On Tue, 2013-06-04 at 13:40 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Robert Haas writes: > > On Tue, Jun 4, 2013 at 11:48 AM, Pavel Raiskup wrote: > >> Oh, I see now it was already consulted here: > >> http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/1368448758.23422.12.ca...@t520.redhat.com > > > I think we should go ahea

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Add support for TAS/S_UNLOCK for aarch64

2013-06-04 Thread Tom Lane
Robert Haas writes: > On Tue, Jun 4, 2013 at 11:48 AM, Pavel Raiskup wrote: >> Oh, I see now it was already consulted here: >> http://www.postgresql.org/message-id/1368448758.23422.12.ca...@t520.redhat.com > I think we should go ahead and commit this patch, or some variant of > it. Having a bui

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Add support for TAS/S_UNLOCK for aarch64

2013-06-04 Thread Robert Haas
On Tue, Jun 4, 2013 at 11:48 AM, Pavel Raiskup wrote: > On Tuesday, June 04, 2013 05:28:09 PM Pavel Raiskup wrote: >> Hi, I was asked [1] to add following patch downstream, could it be >> considered upstream also? Thanks, Pavel. >> >> [1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=970661 > > Oh,

Re: [HACKERS] [PATCH] Add support for TAS/S_UNLOCK for aarch64

2013-06-04 Thread Pavel Raiskup
On Tuesday, June 04, 2013 05:28:09 PM Pavel Raiskup wrote: > Hi, I was asked [1] to add following patch downstream, could it be > considered upstream also? Thanks, Pavel. > > [1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=970661 Oh, I see now it was already consulted here: http://www.postgr

[HACKERS] [PATCH] Add support for TAS/S_UNLOCK for aarch64

2013-06-04 Thread Pavel Raiskup
Hi, I was asked [1] to add following patch downstream, could it be considered upstream also? Thanks, Pavel. [1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=970661 >From ed791f40aa117d4fc273e4b96d9295ee9571fc96 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Mark Salter Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2013 17:23:01 +0200 Subje