This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: [patch] Fix for BZ 16381 -- explicit loader invocation "ld.so ./a.out" on a PIE binary calls global ctors twice
- From: "Carlos O'Donell" <carlos at redhat dot com>
- To: Paul Pluzhnikov <ppluzhnikov at google dot com>
- Cc: GNU C Library <libc-alpha at sourceware dot org>, Siddhesh Poyarekar <siddhesh at redhat dot com>
- Date: Tue, 04 Mar 2014 19:05:34 -0500
- Subject: Re: [patch] Fix for BZ 16381 -- explicit loader invocation "ld.so ./a.out" on a PIE binary calls global ctors twice
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <52D20FE1 dot 60102 at google dot com> <52D80FFC dot 60909 at redhat dot com> <CALoOobOXUbNraGsnoXE7XQnCF+J6uDFootHL2O8=OeysA1vCZA at mail dot gmail dot com> <CALoOobPBn7QxCE1rc+EJAcZ2GN8XxSnen0XbH3b5C=2dz-EOdw at mail dot gmail dot com> <CALoOobOQ+6-JnbMuNSRi==1yQjOoNPwrSoTSfnczhQ4uO-ozhA at mail dot gmail dot com> <CALoOobM4AoNVCHX+-ANMCufxLWLdMajF7xAokpD6AMPUriHrPA at mail dot gmail dot com> <CALoOobMQOKQKqU=-D-Wq-EO5fVK7VjG6A5aA-FyMOU4a+y8Ogg at mail dot gmail dot com> <CALoOobMHVzKnG0KaSK8hJADwBms6rGA6Qn9K13Zn9_cphjZx5w at mail dot gmail dot com> <CALoOobNBij-poxgkV2p-GDExkR_ckR2dU6VUgxF6zt4CnzGaOQ at mail dot gmail dot com> <53165E60 dot 1010105 at redhat dot com>
On 03/04/2014 06:14 PM, Carlos O'Donell wrote:
> On 03/04/2014 04:42 PM, Paul Pluzhnikov wrote:
>> Ping x5?
>>
>> Something is really wrong with out review process when a fix for a
>> clear bug, and a tiny fix at that:
>> https://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/2014-01/msg00341.html
>>
>> takes more than 2 months and 5 pings :-(
>
> Yes, we need more reviewers. Would you like to review some patches? :-)
I will note that while your patch is tiny it touches the dynamic
loader code and those code paths are subtle and difficult to
review.
Probably all the senior reviewers looked at this patch, shivered,
and went about their business reviewing other easier things to
review.
What we need is patch tracker and we need to know what's the oldest
patch in the queue and try to review those first and be fair about
it. That's just my suggestion though, as volunteers y'all can do
what y'all want. I would like to review in some semblance of order
and fairness.
You're 5th ping garnered my pity and you got reviewed while I was
waiting for another build.
Honestly the ping'ing system works well, it brings emails to the
front of my inbox, and the ping count reminds me how long I've
ignored that patch and shows me someone stands behind it.
Despite the fact that it sucks it's kinda working given the
limited reviewers we have.
Cheers,
Carlos.