[PATCH 0/4] Restartable Sequences support for glibc 2.30

[Carlos O'Donell]

On 2/12/19 2:42 PM, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> The only point that still appears to not reach concensus is whether it's
> acceptable to define the RSEQ_SIG code signature for each architecture.
> If I missed other points that failed to reach concensus, please let me
> know!

I have no objection to RSEQ_SIG being a signature that each architecture uses.

Can you summarize the previous discussions here?

-- 
Cheers,
Carlos.