This is the mail archive of the libc-hacker@sources.redhat.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]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: second thoughts on using dl_iterate_phdr() for cache-validation

From: Roland McGrath <roland at redhat dot com>
To: davidm at hpl dot hp dot com
Cc: libc-hacker at sources dot redhat dot com
Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 15:53:55 -0800
Subject: Re: second thoughts on using dl_iterate_phdr() for cache-validation

No new ABI is going to go in very soon.  We have frozen the GLIBC_2.3.4 ABI
already.  (Your patch adds symbols to a version set that has been fixed for
a long time, which is never a kind of patch that would be accepted.)

unsigned long long int is not an atomic type on all platforms, so your code
as written is not acceptable without adding locking for machines where it's
not.  It seems preferable to just used unsigned long int instead, which it
is safe to increment and examine simultaneously on all the platforms we have.

An interface to return the address of such variables is highly dubious,
since it constrains the implementation and does so permanently for the future.

Follow-Ups:
- Re: second thoughts on using dl_iterate_phdr() for cache-validation
  - From: David Mosberger

References:
- Re: second thoughts on using dl_iterate_phdr() for cache-validation
  - From: David Mosberger

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]