** Description changed: - There is a subtle futex bug in glibc 2.15 which is fixed dealt with by - BZ #13844 (http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=13844). + [Impact / Justification] + There was a bug in glibc where custom lowlevellock implementations weren't being used, but rather the generic one was instead. This was a non-issue on most arches, however hppa, ARM, and Sparc needed their own custom implementation to have sane futexes. The patch from upstream fixes this by swapping a "" include for a <> include, which correctly walks sysdeps paths and grabs the arch-specific implementations. + + [Test Case] + I don't personally have a good test for this, but there are several people very keen on having this fix in that will test quite heavily on my behalf, I'm told. I'll make sure they do so (and bonus points if they document their testcase)... + + [Regression Potential] + This patch has zero effect on i386, x86_64, and powerpc, and the architecture this does effect (armel/armhf) was quite fundamentally broken, apparently, so the only risk here is that it remains broken, which I'm told by people who've already tested, it won't. + + [Original Report] + There is a subtle futex bug in glibc 2.15 which is fixed dealt with by BZ #13844 (http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=13844). This is being hit regularly when testing locks on ARM. Can this be backported to precise and quantal (which I believe are both 2.15 based)? The patch is here: http://sourceware.org/git/?p=glibc.git;a=commit;h=7e7fa5f8719c0a497f4b262e6fb5625c13b6c22e
-- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1091186 Title: Backport upstream bug 13844 - fix for futex issue To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/eglibc/+bug/1091186/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
