From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-qv1-xf35.google.com (mail-qv1-xf35.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::f35]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 23E4F3836C62 for ; Tue, 9 Mar 2021 16:17:33 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 sourceware.org 23E4F3836C62 Received: by mail-qv1-xf35.google.com with SMTP id n4so6654505qvl.4 for ; Tue, 09 Mar 2021 08:17:33 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=lxtWcKItl6L0cBqPnKiNPWWHdKjA/yawaXjK6p4VjyA=; b=fFFURcE4q+R7sC3J5ssvCO8HD0BlkjzTpmxmuMzU3sq4UbcQ06+VYgF9za0VmLEkh9 gAUhGPLemj69BaYCw99AO7QDb7BQ2wfyAEOdOuLFajAyzXp/xM0NwKv+HdJ92Fihe3ky CW6gTvkqDVOunOF7GLpzV1xlyTqNzblFlhAgFIZvv0Ja6N4EkVYBbGDTG+KRurWVwO56 kOzvSm1ARwlv9THJ6cnQoGjhHzmCej6eZNdpdqV/gh4SBMSNGvw3l0U31b/7KUEsNcpn XVXTLYx6zKj5QVwZxk0cbIaLH5B6tnUVSOyCfCdA0/wLyZAcaXeW/qa8VKHEx+ILtmOm +oFw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533YVyin+DFp6MJWQ0HBjg6WRhO4+q7arkq+t+s7GefKCXJJ450U nO/CK5wghyEiYQTP1NNutDS/WFqu0qU0Ew== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwizVbScNC0sABNIo0gxxjKqJyWTiJd51MHX8Kf030AXTF/sPA6KhgFhAYTVggTW3RD4pwuWg== X-Received: by 2002:ad4:4421:: with SMTP id e1mr26691293qvt.48.1615306652341; Tue, 09 Mar 2021 08:17:32 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.1.4] ([177.194.48.209]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id q30sm2964072qtd.89.2021.03.09.08.17.31 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 09 Mar 2021 08:17:31 -0800 (PST) Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/4] support: Add xclone To: Florian Weimer , Adhemerval Zanella via Libc-alpha References: <20201223163651.2634504-1-adhemerval.zanella@linaro.org> <87y2ew65ww.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com> From: Adhemerval Zanella Message-ID: <2bd31e3a-5681-0ba0-adf7-08f45c8beaf6@linaro.org> Date: Tue, 9 Mar 2021 13:17:29 -0300 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.7.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <87y2ew65ww.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.5 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, DKIM_VALID_EF, NICE_REPLY_A, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS, TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on server2.sourceware.org X-BeenThere: libc-alpha@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Libc-alpha mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 09 Mar 2021 16:17:35 -0000 On 09/03/2021 06:19, Florian Weimer wrote: > * Adhemerval Zanella via Libc-alpha: > >> +#ifdef __linux__ >> +# define DEFINE_STACK(name, size) \ >> + char name[size] __attribute__ ((aligned)) > > In the light of the MINSIGSTKSZ problems, is this really an appropriate > interface? Should there be separate functions for stack allocation and > deallocation? Indeed, I think routines similar to xalloc_sigstack should be better than this ad hoc routine to make the stack correctly aligned. > > The actual xclone implementation looks okay to me. > > Thanks, > Florian >