1 files changed, 0 insertions, 59 deletions
diff --git a/sys-cluster/ceph/files/ceph-0.87.1-glibc-2.20.patch b/sys-cluster/ceph/files/ceph-0.87.1-glibc-2.20.patch
deleted file mode 100644
index 55a49d72f687..000000000000
--- a/sys-cluster/ceph/files/ceph-0.87.1-glibc-2.20.patch
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,59 +0,0 @@
-From cf2104d4d991361c53f6e2fea93b69de10cd654b Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
-From: Federico Simoncelli <fsimonce@redhat.com>
-Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2014 14:14:04 +0000
-Subject: [PATCH] common: do not unlock rwlock on destruction
-
-According to pthread_rwlock_unlock(3p):
-
- Results are undefined if the read-write lock rwlock is not held
- by the calling thread.
-
-and:
-
- https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17561
-
- Calling pthread_rwlock_unlock on an rwlock which is not locked
- is undefined.
-
-calling pthread_rwlock_unlock on RWLock destruction could cause
-an unknown behavior for two reasons:
-
-- the lock is acquired by another thread (undefined)
-- the lock is not acquired (undefined)
-
-Moreover since glibc-2.20 calling pthread_rwlock_unlock on a
-rwlock that is not locked results in a SIGILL that kills the
-application.
-
-This patch removes the pthread_rwlock_unlock call on destruction
-and replaces it with an assertion to check that the RWLock is
-not in use.
-
-Any code that relied on the implicit release is now going to
-break the assertion, e.g.:
-
- {
-   RWLock l;
-   l.get(for_write);
- } // implicit release, wrong.
-
-Signed-off-by: Federico Simoncelli <fsimonce@redhat.com>
----
- src/common/RWLock.h | 4 +++-
- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
-
-diff --git a/src/common/RWLock.h b/src/common/RWLock.h
-index e647e17..6f0ab8e 100644
---- a/src/common/RWLock.h
-+++ b/src/common/RWLock.h
-@@ -46,7 +46,9 @@ class RWLock
-     return (nwlock.read() > 0);
-   }
-   virtual ~RWLock() {
--    pthread_rwlock_unlock(&L);
-+    // The following check is racy but we are about to destroy
-+    // the object and we assume that there are no other users.
-+    assert(!is_locked());
-     pthread_rwlock_destroy(&L);
-   }
-