From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from forward501b.mail.yandex.net (forward501b.mail.yandex.net [178.154.239.145]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E1C293858D20 for ; Fri, 14 Apr 2023 07:36:30 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org E1C293858D20 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-17.iva.yp-c.yandex.net (mail-nwsmtp-smtp-production-main-17.iva.yp-c.yandex.net [IPv6:2a02:6b8:c0c:79ae:0:640:3507:0]) by forward501b.mail.yandex.net (Yandex) with ESMTP id A97E65EBC4; Fri, 14 Apr 2023 10:36:29 +0300 (MSK) Received: by mail-nwsmtp-smtp-production-main-17.iva.yp-c.yandex.net (smtp/Yandex) with ESMTPSA id RaSS6WCDSSw0-0wpZp49L; Fri, 14 Apr 2023 10:36:29 +0300 X-Yandex-Fwd: 1 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yandex.ru; s=mail; t=1681457789; bh=2ziv1OaaKTpPb6ZAadw3rR++Ggp1ErowYXHm4P+KluE=; h=From:In-Reply-To:Cc:Date:References:To:Subject:Message-ID; b=lS0P0+h7tQeVMEg/XledlOoJIPC6D7vgih0woo9cAolvuGweutvHmVs1juIbUQlW7 x5XbUQeBHzDqnRlQn+gBT9j61adRirzW+Oycsxjml24wsySYENXxWC6qOn125n088q ZmrB6wWdTCVYtmK8WcNUZHqEfWGRTAO/yOAZ7ojU= Authentication-Results: mail-nwsmtp-smtp-production-main-17.iva.yp-c.yandex.net; dkim=pass header.i=@yandex.ru Message-ID: <8f5d510f-7434-ab19-46db-d744ad86b20d@yandex.ru> Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2023 12:36:26 +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 , Zack Weinberg 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=-3.4 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,T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE 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: 14.04.2023 01:02, Adhemerval Zanella Netto пишет: > Because every time someone bring the corner cases you just dismiss saying > that either the person does not understand you [1] and it is up to review > prove you are wrong; or you dismiss saying that the remarks are not > applicable. Yes, because I wrote into my spec that this particular remark in not applicable. In particular I detailed the process of loading a solib, and stated that the initially mmapped buffer should not be modified. Whatever I write to a spec, should be regarded as "the truth by definition" because we discuss _my_ spec, not Carlos's spec. I can't be even asked to "prove what I wrote into a spec" - its an incorrect requirement. But I did an attempt to prove that my _implementation_ is conforming to my spec. No one "noticed"... But it doesn't even matter, because we are discussing a spec, not an implementation! So nothing from my spec should be a subject of some "proving". And per my spec, no "elf parsing" is needed, and no manual arranging of PT_LOAD segments is needed - dlmem() does it itself. This can't be put under any disbelief, because its a spec!