Re: glibc 2.25 machine status?

[Adhemerval Zanella <adhemerval dot zanella at linaro dot org>]

On 03/02/2017 11:11, Carlos O'Donell wrote:
> On 02/03/2017 06:36 AM, Siddhesh Poyarekar wrote:
>> On Friday 03 February 2017 05:00 PM, Adhemerval Zanella wrote:
>>> One option could be removing [1] and check if fixing [2] yields any performance gain
>>> compared to [1].  Otherwise removing both is the best option.
>>>
>>> In any way, it is a nice fix to have, but it is not a release blocker imho.
>>
>> Thanks for the detailed analysis.  Changing routines so close to the
>> release is a bit tricky IMO and we have in the past deferred it until
>> after the release.  I'd say lets do the same for this too unless not
>> fixing this has a significant and known impact on known applications or
>> workloads on sparc.
> 
> I think Dave or the distributions should make that choice, but if it's really
> broken then fixing it would be better than nothing.
> 

I think the idea is to just defer this specific issue to 2.26 and not
handle it as a release blocker.