Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2020 20:35:13 +0200
From: Christoph Berg <myon@debian.org>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com>, pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: powerpc pg_atomic_compare_exchange_u32_impl: error: comparison
 of integer expressions of different signedness (Re: pgsql: For all ppc
 compilers, implement compare_exchange and) fetch_add
Message-ID: <20201011183513.GA709789@msg.df7cb.de>
References: <E1iLfOg-0005hK-98@gemulon.postgresql.org>
 <20201009092825.GD889580@msg.df7cb.de>
 <20201009100117.GA1550390@rfd.leadboat.com>
 <20201011051043.GA1724101@rfd.leadboat.com>
 <3006140.1602436360@sss.pgh.pa.us>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <3006140.1602436360@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Precedence: bulk

Re: Tom Lane
> > I plan not to back-patch either of these.
> 
> Hmm, I'd argue for a back-patch.  The issue of modern compilers
> warning about the incorrect code will apply to all supported branches.
> Moreover, even if we don't use these code paths today, who's to say
> that someone won't back-patch a bug fix that requires them?  I do not
> think it's unreasonable to expect these functions to work well in
> all branches that have them.

Or remove them. (But fixing seems better.)

Christoph