From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.org/gmane.linux.lib.musl.general/10252 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Julien Ramseier Newsgroups: gmane.linux.lib.musl.general Subject: Re: Issues when building libcxx libcxxabi with MUSL Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2016 16:36:09 +0200 Message-ID: <3BEDF5FF-692E-427D-A02C-3950902B9CC7@gmail.com> References: <87e30e04-a81d-4302-5dd7-0846aa0f711b@codeaurora.org> <1165D9B8-DEDB-4393-B734-3FC1AFFAB46F@gmail.com> <20160622194149.GU10893@brightrain.aerifal.cx> <8836ED26-349A-4701-9D7A-F1D2CF272A24@gmail.com> <20160630133827.GA15995@brightrain.aerifal.cx> Reply-To: musl@lists.openwall.com NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.2 \(3112\)) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_A6EC51F6-E896-43FA-8284-846FEED29D10" X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1467297389 5587 80.91.229.3 (30 Jun 2016 14:36:29 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2016 14:36:29 +0000 (UTC) To: musl@lists.openwall.com Original-X-From: musl-return-10265-gllmg-musl=m.gmane.org@lists.openwall.com Thu Jun 30 16:36:29 2016 Return-path: Envelope-to: gllmg-musl@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from mother.openwall.net ([195.42.179.200]) by plane.gmane.org with smtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1bId4s-0005on-Vo for gllmg-musl@m.gmane.org; Thu, 30 Jun 2016 16:36:27 +0200 Original-Received: (qmail 7950 invoked by uid 550); 30 Jun 2016 14:36:24 -0000 Mailing-List: contact musl-help@lists.openwall.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-ID: Original-Received: (qmail 7932 invoked from network); 30 Jun 2016 14:36:24 -0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date:references:to:in-reply-to; bh=EXKxSXqSDNo+txdBU456zDY6Z7rYg2GAO1KO04QrRW4=; b=iBdAmH+0Pih+LvsH7fZ04Vsp9GbEvFZnD9XT6dcinv9VzGBrHVCXWqOvewODnuOeUk jXNvqTK/OXQtOh0XCtByQF1RQNzX/xx8QM5VpTj4gKkn6JebEfyUCK/xuJrI2WQnNk5L dnRgvXUE+s8Vevp5hswDYbr1nZZL73V0C5YmqXc6HGFRAbdrehJ/5r2nEPMc1L5YiOdi LlmXfWd1Wbc5xu5nM8xAtkbFlp4JD0fvirVoui5zDDRDbmDeXGeC4os4MoEp21T1DDGu qkuOYzsasMsj+akvXSlhmmCiBj4W1HLKdN/4/ZhPfABE6sUQm6Mq5y8XsigeI5G4W9sF pNRw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date :references:to:in-reply-to; bh=EXKxSXqSDNo+txdBU456zDY6Z7rYg2GAO1KO04QrRW4=; b=Xz1Mr17CG5FakxVgSiCgUBKN0JjmKp1xDkrVIdIwXgyDLllKwXgA9J2bkxgakdbBUn RfD3aC1BypqATAKGc7h1SNjKIok/TOWiiKsYwhl//7sYEQL+n5g0atYesKMOZcat3x9N tLbtwldmIJSaJa03WD5048nJa8E0UzZxaGIuL9AN7a4DTv1RtnNpfTKwzUAJPG6pSK9s FGgDcfoGGWuT/2W6QgeGFLcogijWnB6szLTh6K51PmV1D3U3WKMuKWQV1SkOw/kz5rrJ VNDZweN4cdcLvt8KZBbRXH3Y2wR9JtYWi8i0ZcUNrcoMCIKbBNHp9RasozNFS3tFy2dw pM9A== X-Gm-Message-State: ALyK8tIcK/t36wFNUgtETyWc9mLCrFm8JPo/pLbN7iY3qiZInTocNhSJ5G1h+ZcJ52KU8A== X-Received: by 10.28.169.69 with SMTP id s66mr15241371wme.78.1467297372246; Thu, 30 Jun 2016 07:36:12 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20160630133827.GA15995@brightrain.aerifal.cx> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3112) Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.linux.lib.musl.general:10252 Archived-At: --Apple-Mail=_A6EC51F6-E896-43FA-8284-846FEED29D10 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 > Le 30 juin 2016 =C3=A0 15:38, Rich Felker a =C3=A9crit= : >=20 > Could you cite the specific text you're looking at? The requirement of > static storage was removed by > http://austingroupbugs.net/view.php?id=3D70 = but I see nothing allowing > the use of mutex values or assigning one to another, which as I > understand it is what the offending libc++ code is doing. I'm not sure what you mean by "mutex value". The libcxx mutex class only uses the PTHREAD_MUTEX_INITIALIZER macro as an initializer for its underlying pthread_mutex member. The part of the spec I was referring to is the use of PTHREAD_MUTEX_INITIALIZER to initialize non-static mutexes, which is what libcxx did and still do with my patch, but in a different way to avoid the constexpr issue due to the nested volatile types. --Apple-Mail=_A6EC51F6-E896-43FA-8284-846FEED29D10 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8
Le 30 juin 2016 =C3=A0 15:38, Rich Felker <dalias@libc.org> a = =C3=A9crit :

Could you cite the specific text you're looking = at? The requirement of
static storage was removed by
http://austingroupbugs.net/view.php?id=3D70 but I see nothing = allowing
the use of mutex values or assigning one to = another, which as I
understand it is what the offending libc++ code = is doing.

I'm not sure = what you mean by "mutex value".
The libcxx mutex class only = uses the PTHREAD_MUTEX_INITIALIZER
macro as an = initializer for its underlying pthread_mutex = member.

The part of the spec = I was referring to is the use of
PTHREAD_MUTEX_INITIALIZER to initialize non-static = mutexes,
which is what libcxx did and still do with my patch, = but in a different
way to avoid the constexpr = issue due to the nested volatile types.

= --Apple-Mail=_A6EC51F6-E896-43FA-8284-846FEED29D10--