mailing list of musl libc
 help / color / mirror / code / Atom feed
From: Solar Designer <solar@openwall.com>
To: musl@lists.openwall.com
Subject: Re: cluts review
Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2011 21:52:01 +0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110713175201.GA25532@openwall.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4E1DD4F3.5090206@gmail.com>

Luka, Rich -

On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 07:25:07PM +0200, Luka Mar??eti?? wrote:
> Anyway, so I need SA_NODEFER because the handler doesn't return, 
> understood. As for the sigsetjmp and stuff, that's what we had before. 
> And yet again, I forgot why it was deprecated (I think there was signal 
> structs being different across platforms, though I'm not sure where the 
> problem was), but anyway Rich suggested sigaction.

I think you're confusing things.  Maybe Rich suggested that you use
sigaction() instead of signal()?  That's fine, but it has nothing to do
with the choice of setjmp() vs. sigsetjmp().

> This reminds me, the code is distinctly C99, and it tests SUSv4 
> functions, so if you don't mind, for cluts, I'll use those two standards 

I am fine with limiting cluts to newer systems if Rich is fine with that.

What I am saying here about sig* has little to do with newer vs. older
systems.  It's just that sigsetjmp() and friends appears to be a cleaner
way to deal with the problem.  Quite in line with what you're advocating.

> and go back to SA_NODEFER.

OK, but there's a cleaner way to do it.

> Oh, and I do believe I know aht "clobbered" means (overwriting the new 
> value of the variable with the old one, from when the context was saved, 
> right?).

Yes.  Do you know in what cases this happens, and how to prevent it?

> That's what I've said I've checked with buf.c.

What exactly did you check/change?

> P.S. Perhaps I should start thinking about how the final cluts.c will 
> look like, otherwise it might become hard to change all the test 
> collections later...

Speaking of overall structure of cluts, I think it's not cluts.c but the
building/linking of the individual test collections that you should
decide on first.  Right now, you have one top-level makefile only (BTW,
the name "Makefile" is more standard on Unix-like systems), which builds
all *.c files into their corresponding binary executables.  And you
include your common code right into each C source.  A cleaner way
would be to build the individual C files into *.o files and to get them
linked together as appropriate - so your common code is only compiled
once, and only some of its symbols are exported.  Also, you could have a
separate Makefile under tests/, which you'd invoke with a sub-make, or
you could get rid of those tests/ and common/ subdirectories in order to
simplify the build process (cluts.c would then need to learn of the
tests to run by other means - e.g., by a filename prefix).  Just some
thoughts.

Thanks,

Alexander


  reply	other threads:[~2011-07-13 17:52 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-07-13 11:07 Solar Designer
2011-07-13 12:02 ` Luka Marčetić
2011-07-13 12:21   ` Solar Designer
2011-07-13 12:57     ` Luka Marčetić
2011-07-13 13:42       ` Rich Felker
2011-07-13 14:21         ` Solar Designer
2011-07-13 13:54       ` Solar Designer
2011-07-13 14:00         ` Rich Felker
2011-07-13 14:31           ` Solar Designer
2011-07-13 14:03     ` Rich Felker
2011-07-13 14:37       ` Solar Designer
2011-07-13 16:03   ` Solar Designer
2011-07-13 16:55     ` Luka Marčetić
2011-07-13 17:05       ` Solar Designer
2011-07-13 17:25         ` Luka Marčetić
2011-07-13 17:52           ` Solar Designer [this message]
2011-07-13 19:29             ` Luka Marčetić
2011-07-13 19:55               ` Rich Felker
2011-07-13 20:39               ` Solar Designer
2011-07-13 21:44                 ` Solar Designer
2011-07-13 19:52             ` Rich Felker
2011-07-13 20:03       ` Rich Felker
2011-07-14 18:56       ` Rich Felker
2011-07-13 13:38 ` Rich Felker
2011-07-13 14:12   ` Solar Designer
2011-07-13 14:26     ` Rich Felker
2011-07-13 14:46       ` Solar Designer
2011-07-13 16:25   ` Luka Marčetić
2011-07-13 17:03     ` Solar Designer

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20110713175201.GA25532@openwall.com \
    --to=solar@openwall.com \
    --cc=musl@lists.openwall.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox

	https://git.vuxu.org/mirror/musl/

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).