From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <dancol@dancol.org>
Received: from dancol.org (dancol.org [IPv6:2600:3c01:e000:3d8::1])
 by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B1ACD3856DE4
 for <libffi-discuss@sourceware.org>; Tue, 31 May 2022 16:47:18 +0000 (GMT)
DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org B1ACD3856DE4
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org;
 dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=dancol.org
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=dancol.org
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=dancol.org; 
 s=x;
 h=Content-Type:MIME-Version:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:Message-ID:
 Date:CC:To:From:Sender:Reply-To:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:
 Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc
 :Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe:
 List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive;
 bh=Rj6Lu6VR2n3+wZHS65vM/D9N1iq32U9kYo1EANyFinM=; b=BZRrIQLccmvQdh8qrAHeujkoQ2
 V3oZiTXx9AJe+o2TgDP4gle53hMCACl66ZP+o3ZGyqvAZ4A6eYPOu7OxCNUUhf4NEOZV0yaKEoTFi
 Pf1do8XXY8jDeGHgux0qLX99/cglaWKVoTymeXj3NpeLo2M57Utzwc+Q01+yFPr+D3kH0ryCL2dRl
 xxZ4CBKcrPdWDmmhyDq9dYkHFInXKMLagIAE6wW7NSFLC4g/szvswirZHsNA0aQfH3rvnF40o8OdE
 Td1ZK/p4ex8raAUN5p3GWM8ignqWzZAfHc+pQ+npvrN77TJw3DSp3EcU93VfINNsU1PyghDiw5ZVi
 N4+lOf3w==;
Received: from 96.sub-174-211-237.myvzw.com ([174.211.237.96]:13839
 helo=[100.112.31.188])
 by dancol.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128)
 (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from <dancol@dancol.org>)
 id 1nw51X-0007eY-5W; Tue, 31 May 2022 09:47:15 -0700
From: <dancol@dancol.org>
To: DJ Delorie <dj@redhat.com>, Anthony Green <green@moxielogic.com>,
 "DJ Delorie via Libffi-discuss" <libffi-discuss@sourceware.org>
CC: <libffi-discuss@sourceware.org>
Date: Tue, 31 May 2022 12:47:13 -0400
Message-ID: <1811b03a668.2829.cc5b3318d7e9908e2c46732289705cb0@dancol.org>
In-Reply-To: <xn1qw9snp6.fsf@greed.delorie.com>
References: <xn1qw9snp6.fsf@greed.delorie.com>
User-Agent: AquaMail/1.35.0 (build: 103500130)
Subject: Re: Change in libffi behaviour -- large struct args
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, DKIM_SIGNED,
 DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, DKIM_VALID_EF, HTML_MESSAGE, SPF_HELO_PASS,
 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
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.29
X-BeenThere: libffi-discuss@sourceware.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Libffi-discuss mailing list <libffi-discuss.sourceware.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://sourceware.org/mailman/options/libffi-discuss>,
 <mailto:libffi-discuss-request@sourceware.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://sourceware.org/pipermail/libffi-discuss/>
List-Post: <mailto:libffi-discuss@sourceware.org>
List-Help: <mailto:libffi-discuss-request@sourceware.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://sourceware.org/mailman/listinfo/libffi-discuss>,
 <mailto:libffi-discuss-request@sourceware.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 31 May 2022 16:47:20 -0000

On May 31, 2022 11:53:56 DJ Delorie via Libffi-discuss 
<libffi-discuss@sourceware.org> wrote:

> While this is technically an ABI change, if the "old" ABI never worked,
> I can't see how this would break anything by changing.
>
> I will add that passing structs is likely more complex than you think ;-)

The problem is that whether the old API was broken or not, changing it can 
break working code. What do the libffi people think about using symbol 
versioning?