Re: [PATCHES] Reorganization of spinlock defines

On Thu, 11 Sep 2003, Bruce Momjian wrote:

> Yes, but to throw an error if spinlocks aren't found, we need this
> patch.  We would have to test for Opteron in all the platforms that test
> for specific CPU's but don't test for opteron, and might support
> opterion/itanium, but even then, we don't have any way of getting a
> report of a failure.

'K, but apparently right now we are broken on Opteron/Itanium without this
patch ... so, to fix, we either:

a. add appropriate tests to the individual port files based on individual
failure reports (albeit not clean, definitely safer), or:

b. we do massive, sweeping changes to the whole HAVE_TEST_AND_SET
detection code (definitely cleaner, but has potential of breaking more
then it fixes) :(

personally, as late in the cycle as we are, I think that a. is the wiser
move for v7.4, with b. being something that should happen as soon as
possible once we've branched and start working on v7.5 ...