This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: [PATCH RFC] explicit_bzero, again
- From: Zack Weinberg <zackw at panix dot com>
- To: Joseph Myers <joseph at codesourcery dot com>
- Cc: GNU C Library <libc-alpha at sourceware dot org>
- Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2015 18:55:01 -0400
- Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] explicit_bzero, again
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <55C7E246 dot 3000006 at panix dot com> <alpine dot DEB dot 2 dot 10 dot 1508101434370 dot 24619 at digraph dot polyomino dot org dot uk>
On Mon, Aug 10, 2015 at 10:40 AM, Joseph Myers <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> On Sun, 9 Aug 2015, Zack Weinberg wrote:
>> * sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/powerpc/powerpc32/fpu/libc.abilist
>> * sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/powerpc/powerpc32/nofpu/libc.abilist
>> * sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/powerpc/powerpc64/libc.abilist
> sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/powerpc/powerpc64/libc-le.abilist also needs
Did that just get added, like, yesterday? I am not sure why `find`
didn't find it.
> Missing space before '('.
Thanks, I'm a bit out of practice coding in GNU style.
> I think you should use __may_alias__ here (there's no reason to take the
> symbol may_alias from the user's namespace, notwithstanding that this is
I thought attribute names didn't conflict with any other namespace?
But sure, I can make that change.
> Stray patch hunk adding a blank line.
That was actually intentional -- this file seems to separate groups of
functions with double blank lines. But I can take it back out again.
Does anyone have more substantive concerns with this patch, or are we
good to go once I fix up the style?