Req #53310 [Com]: fpm_atomic.h uses SPARC v9 only code, doesn't work on v8

From: Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2010 07:27:32 +0000
Subject: Req #53310 [Com]: fpm_atomic.h uses SPARC v9 only code, doesn't work on v8
References: 1  Groups: php.bugs 
Request: Send a blank email to php-bugs+get-156109@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message
Edit report at http://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=53310&edit=1

 ID:                 53310
 Comment by:         fat@php.net
 Reported by:        stefan at whocares dot de
 Summary:            fpm_atomic.h uses SPARC v9 only code, doesn't work
                     on v8
 Status:             Wont fix
 Type:               Feature/Change Request
 Package:            FPM related
 Operating System:   Linux (Debian for Sparc)
 PHP Version:        5.3.3
 Assigned To:        fat
 Block user comment: N
 Private report:     N

 New Comment:

one simple test is to make php core the less as possible. You can create
a file 
test.php wich does nothing but an "echo". 

Then you stress this page with FPM with ab (ab -c 100 -n 10000 
http://ip:port/test.php

While the test is running you check the status page and see how it's
goin' on.

it should be a good primary test.


Previous Comments:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[2010-11-17 02:19:15] stefan at whocares dot de

First of all: thanks for not taking my rant badly :)

Of course I can run this code and, well "test" it. I would have been
happier 
however if someone besides me had looked over the code and said "yes,
that looks 
like it could work" ;)

Right now it *is* running on two ReadyNAS (Sparc) boxes as well as on my
SunFire 
280R. It doesn't segfault which to me is a good sign and it's producing
normale 
output from the small test scripts I have run. Haven't done extensive
testing so 
far but will try running Wordpress and Drupal in the next couple of
days. If 
there's any special test you'd like to see me run against the patched
version of 
PHP, let me know.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
[2010-11-17 01:18:49] fat@php.net

@stefan at whocares dot de
Did you run your patch on a ReadyNAS box ? If you test it and tell us it
works, 
there is not reason not to integrate it. As far as I know, it's not been
tested 
but for compilation only.

We don't want to leave someone behind, but as pierre told you there is
priorities. 
We'll be glad if you help us.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
[2010-11-17 01:16:15] pajoye@php.net

and I was wiling to write arch, not OS....

------------------------------------------------------------------------
[2010-11-17 01:15:26] pajoye@php.net

It was not badly meant, only trying to show you alternative. 

I can't know nor judge the reason why you need v8 support, but have been
there many times in the past for my numerous projects.

We have to make decisions about which platforms we can support, and also
which we stop to support. There is nothing personal or aggressive in our
replies, only trying to explain the status and the reasoning behind it.

Sorry if you took it so badly, that's not the aim of our comments, or
mines in particular.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
[2010-11-17 01:09:51] stefan at whocares dot de

@pajoye@php.net
Did it ever occur to you that I found this bug/problem because I
*specifically 
wanted to use FPM* in the first place? Had I wanted to use FastCGI I'd
have 
certainly done so. Seeing that there already was a solution for Sparc v9
I 
thought there might be interest in a solution that would allow PHP to
run on 
older machines.

Hardware that maybe you're laughing about. But hardware that's still in
fairly 
wide use. And, come to think of it, hardware that may also be the only
hardware 
people in poorer countries than the one you're obviously living in are
able to 
get their hands on. So I first asked and then got my hands dirty and
even 
provided a possible solution - and one that could be easily implemented,
too.

And what for? Only to get ignorance and witty remarks in return. Well, I
almost 
forgot that the PHP project has such a bad reputation when it comes to
bugs and 
patches. Thanks for reminding me why. Now you can safely go back to your
ivory 
tower and think about supporting next decade's hardware only. For my
part, I 
promise to keep any bugs/problems in PHP I may find in the future to
myself and 
will do the same for any patches I may come up with.

Btw: the boxes I'm talking about are running Linux (which you could have
seen by 
looking at the "OS:" tag) and I really have no idea why you'd call that
a "soon 
to be dead OS". If you have a problem understanding the difference
between a CPU 
and an OS, may I ask what exactly makes you think you can give some
valuable 
input here? As for the "cruelly needed developers" you mention: I don't
see why 
you should need those as long as the community comes up with patches you
could 
use. Ok, if you keep driving away people like this, I start to have an
idea as 
to why ;)

------------------------------------------------------------------------


The remainder of the comments for this report are too long. To view
the rest of the comments, please view the bug report online at

    http://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=53310


-- 
Edit this bug report at http://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=53310&edit=1


Thread (21 messages)

« previous php.bugs (#156109) next »