This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: [PATCH v3] explicit_bzero yet again
- From: "Carlos O'Donell" <carlos at redhat dot com>
- To: Zack Weinberg <zackw at panix dot com>
- Cc: GNU C Library <libc-alpha at sourceware dot org>, Adhemerval Zanella <adhemerval dot zanella at linaro dot org>
- Date: Mon, 11 Jan 2016 16:07:22 -0500
- Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] explicit_bzero yet again
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <564DE0BE dot 5070607 at panix dot com> <5665921D dot 7050507 at panix dot com> <CAKCAbMh9HF5XAQq2v0XLymF1xF+iL+EY6MUz9V8pbcWinCh+iQ at mail dot gmail dot com> <5693C700 dot 6040302 at panix dot com> <5693CB79 dot 3010005 at redhat dot com> <CAKCAbMgRHV17oBedrjrvFNGGZ7csyjdSXHtO9hcVSrQKMWL+2A at mail dot gmail dot com>
On 01/11/2016 01:08 PM, Zack Weinberg wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 10:34 AM, Carlos O'Donell <carlos@redhat.com> wrote:
>> On 01/11/2016 10:15 AM, Zack Weinberg wrote:
>>> My hacking time is very limited right now. With the freeze looming, I
>>> would appreciate a definitive yes-or-no answer to whether this will be
>>> accepted for the next release (possibly with some concrete list of
>>> changes) so I know whether I need to find time in the near future.
>>
>> I'd nack this for 2.23, and review again in 2.24.
>
> In that case, I'm going to drop this for now and pick up again when I
> have more time.
>
>> If there isn't already a gcc bug filed for creating this barrier
>> we should file one now.
>
> I tried to start a conversation on gcc@ (and clang-dev) about that a
> couple months ago but no one seemed interested. I don't have time to
> push such a conversation (in any venue) right now.
File the bug anyway? At least we can use the bug to centralize
links to ml discussions? For slow moving projects like this it
is useful to have this kind of open bug to aggregate discussions.
Cheers,
Carlos.