From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from forward502c.mail.yandex.net (forward502c.mail.yandex.net [IPv6:2a02:6b8:c03:500:1:45:d181:d502]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 769E23858D20 for ; Thu, 13 Apr 2023 20:22:04 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org 769E23858D20 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=yandex.ru Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=yandex.ru Received: from mail-nwsmtp-smtp-production-main-69.iva.yp-c.yandex.net (mail-nwsmtp-smtp-production-main-69.iva.yp-c.yandex.net [IPv6:2a02:6b8:c0c:610a:0:640:be20:0]) by forward502c.mail.yandex.net (Yandex) with ESMTP id 4BC435EA71; Thu, 13 Apr 2023 23:22:01 +0300 (MSK) Received: by mail-nwsmtp-smtp-production-main-69.iva.yp-c.yandex.net (smtp/Yandex) with ESMTPSA id wLeigT7Dea60-Xm1FP8ls; Thu, 13 Apr 2023 23:22:00 +0300 X-Yandex-Fwd: 1 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yandex.ru; s=mail; t=1681417320; bh=yJVtV7qyC1N5qbUsRC2dNSHYw/JtVShtM1W//bajCTs=; h=From:In-Reply-To:Cc:Date:References:To:Subject:Message-ID; b=pyE6ULkOnMujswdjDxSH85NlCelwA18HcgzRL7SbL2RSznLVQcmcjAkLRe2YmeGes xOf524FP2OBUOiqprdUDQQ0I3rPUS/5uS8NSKYrDgCvJfdgw51x5uV4FB3p8MVR2T6 Ae1sZ/saQRWs61PKOC8yG+THxOmyCusR27sgRcFM= Authentication-Results: mail-nwsmtp-smtp-production-main-69.iva.yp-c.yandex.net; dkim=pass header.i=@yandex.ru Message-ID: <748ae4f7-82c5-81e4-0559-725303ada66a@yandex.ru> Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2023 01:21:58 +0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.10.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 0/13] implement dlmem() function Content-Language: en-US To: Adhemerval Zanella Netto , Szabolcs Nagy , Rich Felker Cc: libc-alpha@sourceware.org, janderson@rice.edu, Carlos O'Donell References: <298b04a6-3055-b89b-59c1-4cfbe955848e@yandex.ru> <81749d04-8cdb-de0b-b88e-24347ed535ba@yandex.ru> <729710b5-6dae-d5f2-99ee-6923be5e627d@yandex.ru> <20230412182043.GI3298@brightrain.aerifal.cx> <08d9ca95-112c-d85e-8e82-7a595ef4d051@yandex.ru> <78b5b5dc-5657-4bf8-24c6-6c00afb1cc40@yandex.ru> <83ee7b42-7a50-e8d1-e9ca-58ec2a12a995@linaro.org> <59862084-0fe3-7642-d3b3-01bb87eef7db@yandex.ru> <52d0b5e8-2c81-66e6-60dc-771d01b26fd6@linaro.org> From: stsp In-Reply-To: <52d0b5e8-2c81-66e6-60dc-771d01b26fd6@linaro.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.8 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,BODY_8BITS,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT,FREEMAIL_FROM,NICE_REPLY_A,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org List-Id: Adhemerval, 14.04.2023 01:02, Adhemerval Zanella Netto пишет: > Because it is the same remark bought *multiple* times in this thread [1] > that you keep saying it is not important on the discussion: > > "It would be possible to require the caller to arrange all of > these things, but that's basically offloading A LOT of the ELF > loading process onto the calling program and I don't think that > makes for a reasonable public interface for glibc to provide." That cr^H^Hcomment was indeed brought to me several times. But there is a second part of a deal, which is to explain how it is ever relevant to my patches. Maybe it was not possible before I wrote a proper spec draft, but its definitely possible now. > And every time someone brought it [2], you just reply that ... that its a bu^H^Hirrelevant comment, having ZERO relevance to my patches? Well, its true. Now when the patches are properly specced, I think I have a right to ask why that comment is even raised at all. Does it have anything to do with my spec draft? No. Does it have anything to do with my patches? No. Does it have anything to do with my usage examples? No. Does it anything to do with some theoretical usage examples of my API? Still no! Does it have to do with anything at all? No. What should I do? :( Oh, idea! Szabolcs never lies, I trust him. If he says I should address (or even read) that comment, and that its a comment that is "somehow" relevant to my API and patches, then I'll bring my patches down. But so far I was only seeing that comment as an attempt to discredit my work by any price, even by the pure hideous lie. :( > this since it > does not fit in your usercase this is not an acceptable solution. And I never said anything like this, too. > And > then we kept in circles, with multiple developers saying that this > interface-like is not reasonable, and you saying that it is the only way > to solve your specific usercase. No. We are walking in circles with intentionally malicious argument towards my work, because you wanted to put my patches down by any price. This is unacceptable. Szabolcs will not repeat that malicious argument, or if he will, I'll put my patches down.