From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.org/gmane.linux.lib.musl.general/3613 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Rob Landley Newsgroups: gmane.linux.lib.musl.general Subject: Re: Thinking about release Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2013 14:38:36 -0500 Message-ID: <1373485116.27613.40@driftwood> References: <20130709053711.GO29800@brightrain.aerifal.cx> Reply-To: musl@lists.openwall.com NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; DelSp=Yes; Format=Flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1373485132 11323 80.91.229.3 (10 Jul 2013 19:38:52 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2013 19:38:52 +0000 (UTC) Cc: musl@lists.openwall.com To: musl@lists.openwall.com Original-X-From: musl-return-3617-gllmg-musl=m.gmane.org@lists.openwall.com Wed Jul 10 21:38:54 2013 Return-path: Envelope-to: gllmg-musl@plane.gmane.org Original-Received: from mother.openwall.net ([195.42.179.200]) by plane.gmane.org with smtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Ux0E0-0006Wa-Bu for gllmg-musl@plane.gmane.org; Wed, 10 Jul 2013 21:38:52 +0200 Original-Received: (qmail 19949 invoked by uid 550); 10 Jul 2013 19:38:51 -0000 Mailing-List: contact musl-help@lists.openwall.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: Original-Received: (qmail 19941 invoked from network); 10 Jul 2013 19:38:51 -0000 X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=date:from:subject:to:cc:in-reply-to:x-mailer:message-id :mime-version:content-type:content-disposition :content-transfer-encoding:x-gm-message-state; bh=k09qAzjl80TVZHIpl4Q/UndM/Uubb7Md8Hinf6Oqd8k=; b=X+/7KAfQ9Prve6ylYoutcnCstOCqR/bzurCq0RmJ4juaAizSQKyfGDsT4+uX6xw0qC QIicFqqW4nPDjf+SB6R+ftwe5xIjMLrmBQC1/9v7z2wb4n5LVDLiYB8ehgqfkpEhI1n+ 1n2xpvlcmMIeSutX+LfzsCfLGskf7HmlqK+KBGV2oaza3h1W5XA5SKBGuAqYIN4Ps5w9 DMMHDwsp1M1w2S+VwkLZz8VnsbVdZtOmn9X362ccwIis6liKmfuKJGGuX6zta1fimag+ zsKZJt/aAm/lN5pdZMAuHYcAGtnASpwhmoi3MpZ4e97WlPtICILhziQ8Uc5MpuBaF2oo XV+g== X-Received: by 10.236.30.134 with SMTP id k6mr18919846yha.125.1373485119633; Wed, 10 Jul 2013 12:38:39 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20130709053711.GO29800@brightrain.aerifal.cx> (from dalias@aerifal.cx on Tue Jul 9 00:37:12 2013) X-Mailer: Balsa 2.4.11 Content-Disposition: inline X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQm10VGUGUT4Q4GX0nXhobW7UhZFcBVHaOg8+vzoX6mwTFyFkiFTM2VngL1JwLNvODXUGfsu Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.linux.lib.musl.general:3613 Archived-At: On 07/09/2013 12:37:12 AM, Rich Felker wrote: > On Tue, Jul 09, 2013 at 05:06:21PM +1200, Andre Renaud wrote: > > The git tree is available here: > > =20 > https://github.com/AndreRenaud/musl/commit/713023e7320cf45b116d1c29b6155e= ce28904e69 >=20 > It's an open question whether it's better to sync something like this > with an 'upstream' or adapt it to musl coding conventions. Generally > musl uses explicit instructions rather than pseudo-instructions/macros > for prologue and epilogue, and does not use named labels. Do your own local version. You can always copy ideas from other =20 projects if "upstream" changes later. > > Does anyone have any comments on the suitability of this code, or =20 > what >=20 > If nothing else, it fails to be armv4 compatible. Query: did you ever implement a non-thumb version of armv4 eabi =20 support? I remember some discussion about it being possible, I don't =20 remember the outcome. > Fixing that should > not be hard, but it would require a bit of an audit. The return > sequences are the obvious issue, but there may be other instructions > in use that are not available on armv4 or maybe not even on armv5...? I've beaten armv4-only, armv4t-only, and armv5-only modes out of qemu. =20 That's the reason for the first half of my versatile patch: =20 http://landley.net/hg/aboriginal/file/1612/sources/patches/linux-arm.patch > > kind of more rigorous testing could be applied? >=20 > See above. >=20 > What also might be worth testing is whether GCC can compete if you > just give it a naive loop (not the fancy pseudo-vectorized stuff > currently in musl) and good CFLAGS. I know on x86 I was able to beat > the fanciest asm strlen I could come up with simply by writing the > naive loop in C and unrolling it a lot. Duff's device! Rob =