This is the mail archive of the libc-alpha@sourceware.org mailing list for the glibc project.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
Other format: | [Raw text] |
On Wednesday 13 June 2012 12:32:10 Jeff Law wrote: > On 06/12/2012 11:44 AM, Roland McGrath wrote: > >> http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=13882 - contains a > >> patch. > > > > In fact it contains pointers to archives of this list, where Jeff > > posted patches. > > > >> Last time we discussed the bugs on the mailing list, Roland > >> mentioned that he wanted to review this later. Roland, could you do > >> this now, please? Or anybody else volunteering to review this bug > >> in the dynamic linker? > > > > I don't recall saying that and I don't think I have especially great > > context on this stuff. I think Jeff should just restart the review > > by posting the minimal patch he wants to get in. > > When sorting objects to ensure proper initialization order we terminate > the sort too early resulting in incorrect initialization order for DSOs. > > Additionally, the sorting code is limited in the number of DSOs it can > properly handle because it using an array of chars for counts. nice work. so by going to uint16_t, the new ldso limit is 65536 rather than 127 ? should we add a pathological assert when that limit is hit ? is it possible to add the tests to the tree to keep things from regressing ? seems like a corner case that is easy to break again :(. -mike
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |