This is the mail archive of the libc-hacker@sourceware.cygnus.com mailing list for the glibc project.
Note that libc-hacker is a closed list. You may look at the archives of this list, but subscription and posting are not open.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
>>>>> Greg McGary writes: Greg> Andreas Jaeger <aj@suse.de> writes: >> Could you give some details about the current status? Greg> I'm mostly working on getting glibc changes checked in, which will Greg> probably take another week or so. I'll announce when it's ready for Greg> testing. Thanks. Greg> After glibc, I have a big pile of gcc changes to commit. That might Greg> take many weeks, since patch approval latency is much longer. Greg> However, BP gcc is available right away since I have all my changes on Greg> a branch. Ok, I'll check it out soonish. >> Does it make sense to test builds with bounded pointers? Greg> Not yet. Testing BP builds will be a good idea as soon as I have all Greg> glibc changes checked in. >> On which architectures does it work? Greg> It mostly works on ix86: gcc bootstraps with BP glibc. It almost Greg> works on PowerPC: there are still a few gcc bootstrap problems. Greg> Targets I will work on next are MIPS and i960. After that, if I have Greg> time, and no one else has done them yet, I'll do on IA-64, SPARC and Greg> Alpha. >> I guess I need the current gcc from CVS for this - or >> do I need extra patches for GCC? Greg> My compiler changes are on a CVS branch: bounded-pointers-branch. >> I'd appreciate if you could write some documentation about the bounded >> pointer support when you're finished. This should be added to the >> manual and perhaps also to the FAQ. Greg> I don't see that there's much to write about BPs in the glibc manual, Greg> just as there's very little to write about the static debug or Greg> profiling versions of glibc: they implement API-compatible drop-in Greg> replacements and are thus transparent to the user. By contrast, the Greg> debug and profiling versions are also ABI-compatible whereas the BP Greg> version is not. IMO, BPs are more properly documented in the gcc Greg> manual and the glibc manual need only refer the reader to the gcc Greg> manual. What do you think? Do you need to compile glibc with bp support if you want to use it in user programs? We should at least explain the --enable-bounded parameter in the manual (see INSTALL/install.texi). If everything is explained in gcc, there's no further need to document it - I'll look later again into it. Andreas -- Andreas Jaeger SuSE Labs aj@suse.de private aj@arthur.inka.de
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |