From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <fw@deneb.enyo.de>
Received: from albireo.enyo.de (albireo.enyo.de [37.24.231.21])
 by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6EBD0384B061
 for <libc-alpha@sourceware.org>; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 15:20:47 +0000 (GMT)
DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 sourceware.org 6EBD0384B061
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org;
 dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=deneb.enyo.de
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=fw@deneb.enyo.de
Received: from [172.17.203.2] (helo=deneb.enyo.de)
 by albireo.enyo.de with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256)
 id 1kfPGG-0004Zm-Jw; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 15:20:44 +0000
Received: from fw by deneb.enyo.de with local (Exim 4.92)
 (envelope-from <fw@deneb.enyo.de>)
 id 1kfPGG-0002AO-Hr; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 16:20:44 +0100
From: Florian Weimer <fw@deneb.enyo.de>
To: "H.J. Lu via Libc-alpha" <libc-alpha@sourceware.org>
Cc: Zack Weinberg <zackw@panix.com>, "H.J. Lu" <hjl.tools@gmail.com>,
 Dave Martin <Dave.Martin@arm.com>, Joseph Myers <joseph@codesourcery.com>
Subject: Re: PING: V7 [PATCH] sysconf: Add _SC_MINSIGSTKSZ/_SC_SIGSTKSZ [BZ
 #20305]
References: <alpine.DEB.2.21.2010122201030.4518@digraph.polyomino.org.uk>
 <CAMe9rOqtkRBtoQH7v3kESoUX5LF6xun+d2CCOiXEOVCdy7vy0g@mail.gmail.com>
 <20201014174659.GL32292@arm.com> <20201015115728.GA64160@gmail.com>
 <20201019150846.GP32292@arm.com>
 <CAMe9rOpXODwGf4OTrD9seCFOqnMvV23uK_GfxjrOOp6Cv2G9pw@mail.gmail.com>
 <20201020091912.GS32292@arm.com>
 <CAMe9rOr7D_m11dw9QB0UG1=poG1_2r0B87sP3xw0EBZ7AimsDw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAMe9rOoG8E4cgt_HOw-EEAOyQ5cGGKRebmA2YsY=zYefq7cc1A@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAMe9rOrt+4Tqdya42Uozz_ja2QnDYut4MggQ57yS7aDrbD5QiQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <20201104165018.GE6882@arm.com>
 <CAMe9rOoe=tGQp4GqBx3r=vZ8EhmdyJxFK6LWV=Xrt_TwCEC=zw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAMe9rOpnqmRFaMpewvhZjuxRfPoEN9egJbrxsC5vyDE=TYa9XQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAKCAbMiSXDutMjk5Y15KBnP_4cis0DrzRLKUN9Net+uHi578WA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAMe9rOpHABAhSzop8_M+UXRtd8cLKD6c-uSUEFcrKA6JeBqfrA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAKCAbMiwCGrXhAHHB7ZqQNpDCEn-fXZuPXVz79SVqbVDnxdeiw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAMe9rOrSVKQeQLy4Sk1n42KvKw3fh+7ZVDY909kk-g37iqiOSQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 16:20:44 +0100
In-Reply-To: <CAMe9rOrSVKQeQLy4Sk1n42KvKw3fh+7ZVDY909kk-g37iqiOSQ@mail.gmail.com>
 (H. J. Lu via Libc-alpha's message of "Wed, 18 Nov 2020 07:17:10
 -0800")
Message-ID: <87lfeyvghf.fsf@mid.deneb.enyo.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, KAM_DMARC_STATUS,
 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 <libc-alpha.sourceware.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://sourceware.org/mailman/options/libc-alpha>,
 <mailto:libc-alpha-request@sourceware.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://sourceware.org/pipermail/libc-alpha/>
List-Post: <mailto:libc-alpha@sourceware.org>
List-Help: <mailto:libc-alpha-request@sourceware.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://sourceware.org/mailman/listinfo/libc-alpha>,
 <mailto:libc-alpha-request@sourceware.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 15:20:48 -0000

* H. J. Lu via Libc-alpha:

> On Wed, Nov 18, 2020 at 7:13 AM Zack Weinberg <zackw@panix.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Nov 18, 2020 at 9:40 AM H.J. Lu <hjl.tools@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > On Wed, Nov 18, 2020 at 6:26 AM Zack Weinberg <zackw@panix.com> wrote:
>> > >
>> > > On Wed, Nov 18, 2020 at 9:14 AM H.J. Lu via Libc-alpha
>> > > <libc-alpha@sourceware.org> wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > If there are no more comments, I will check in it together with
>> > > >
>> > > > https://sourceware.org/pipermail/libc-alpha/2020-October/118707.html
>> > > >
>> > > > on Friday, Nov 20.
>> > >
>> > > I don't think you have consensus for this ABI-breaking change, and I
>> > > *certainly* don't think you should check it in without positive
>> > > agreement from at least one other person.
>> > >
>> >
>> > My patch adds _SC_SIGSTKSZ_SOURCE.   There are no changes
>> > unless _SC_SIGSTKSZ_SOURCE is defined.
>>
>> OK, but do we have consensus on adding a new _*_SOURCE macro and a new
>> sysconf parameter ahead of their adoption by POSIX?  This is not a
>
> This is what Dave and I came up with.  This approach doesn't change ABI
> unless it is requested by developers.

Did you mean ABI?

I think we should use _GNU_SOURCE. We can add another feature macro if
it's adopted by POSIX.