This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: [PATCH 14/17 v5] Avoid stack-protecting signal-handling functions sibcalled from assembly.
- From: Andreas Schwab <schwab at linux-m68k dot org>
- To: Florian Weimer <fweimer at redhat dot com>
- Cc: Nix <nix at esperi dot org dot uk>, libc-alpha at sourceware dot org
- Date: Mon, 16 May 2016 11:15:54 +0200
- Subject: Re: [PATCH 14/17 v5] Avoid stack-protecting signal-handling functions sibcalled from assembly.
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <1457882222-22599-1-git-send-email-nix at esperi dot org dot uk> <1457882222-22599-15-git-send-email-nix at esperi dot org dot uk> <3a1025f2-8b0e-5d9b-01c4-7b4e4ef62cc8 at redhat dot com> <87r3d3odkd dot fsf at esperi dot org dot uk> <87r3d38v88 dot fsf at linux-m68k dot org> <87eg93nycw dot fsf at esperi dot org dot uk> <87inyf8goy dot fsf at linux-m68k dot org> <81349146-3e57-88e5-dbc9-230987e6bfc1 at redhat dot com>
Florian Weimer <email@example.com> writes:
> On 05/15/2016 05:49 PM, Andreas Schwab wrote:
>> Nix <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
>>> On 15 May 2016, Andreas Schwab verbalised:
>>>> Nix <email@example.com> writes:
>>>>> I'll have a hunt for whatever it is that's causing sigjmp.c to not be
>>>>> rebuilt after this test cycle, because that's the underlying bug here,
>>>> Just changing CFLAGS-foo doesn't trigger a rebuild of dependent objects.
>>> Well, no, but sigjmp.c should be rebuilt if it's incorporated in ld.so
>>> anyway: we should be getting an rtld-sigjmp.o, and we're not.
>> Most architectures implement setjmp in assembler anyway.
> But a lot (all?) of them use a C tail for some of the work, and the patch
> is about how that is compiled.
Ahh, yes, sigjmp, not setjmp. :-)
Andreas Schwab, firstname.lastname@example.org
GPG Key fingerprint = 58CA 54C7 6D53 942B 1756 01D3 44D5 214B 8276 4ED5
"And now for something completely different."