On Thu, 14 Apr 2022 at 16:24, Palmer Dabbelt wrote:
>
> On Thu, 14 Apr 2022 08:22:05 PDT (-0700), jwak...@redhat.com wrote:
> > On Thu, 14 Apr 2022 at 16:18, Palmer Dabbelt wrote:
> >>
> >> On Thu, 14 Apr 2022 08:08:17 PDT (-0700), jwak...@redhat.com wrote:
> >> > On 07/04/22 11:46 -0700, Palmer D
On Thu, 14 Apr 2022 08:22:05 PDT (-0700), jwak...@redhat.com wrote:
On Thu, 14 Apr 2022 at 16:18, Palmer Dabbelt wrote:
On Thu, 14 Apr 2022 08:08:17 PDT (-0700), jwak...@redhat.com wrote:
> On 07/04/22 11:46 -0700, Palmer Dabbelt wrote:
>>The RISC-V port requires libatomic to be linked in order
On Thu, 14 Apr 2022 at 16:18, Palmer Dabbelt wrote:
>
> On Thu, 14 Apr 2022 08:08:17 PDT (-0700), jwak...@redhat.com wrote:
> > On 07/04/22 11:46 -0700, Palmer Dabbelt wrote:
> >>The RISC-V port requires libatomic to be linked in order to resolve
> >>various atomic functions, which results in build
On Thu, 14 Apr 2022 08:08:17 PDT (-0700), jwak...@redhat.com wrote:
On 07/04/22 11:46 -0700, Palmer Dabbelt wrote:
The RISC-V port requires libatomic to be linked in order to resolve
various atomic functions, which results in builds that have
"--with-libstdcxx-lock-policy=auto" defaulting to mut
On 07/04/22 11:46 -0700, Palmer Dabbelt wrote:
The RISC-V port requires libatomic to be linked in order to resolve
various atomic functions, which results in builds that have
"--with-libstdcxx-lock-policy=auto" defaulting to mutex-based locks.
Changing this to direct atomics breaks the ABI, this
The RISC-V port requires libatomic to be linked in order to resolve
various atomic functions, which results in builds that have
"--with-libstdcxx-lock-policy=auto" defaulting to mutex-based locks.
Changing this to direct atomics breaks the ABI, this forces the auto
detection mutex-based atomics on
