[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: memory_object_lock_request and memory_object_data_return fnord
From: |
Roland McGrath |
Subject: |
Re: memory_object_lock_request and memory_object_data_return fnord |
Date: |
Mon, 25 Mar 2002 01:54:42 -0500 (EST) |
> I was thinking along the lines of changing the __memcpy's found in
> libc/sysdep/i386/{,i[456]86}/memcpy.S et al. to __real_memcpy and then
> having a libc/sysdep/mach/memcpy.c do:
Eh, that's only half of it. memcpy is as likely to be inlined in the
bits/string.h magic, or by the compiler. And then there's doing this all
over again for every other platform, and keeping track of new implementations.
And even if you hack all the header files, there's still inlined versions
from things compiled for GNU/Linux one day when we have binary compatibility.
I am very dubious about changing memcpy.
- Re: memory_object_lock_request and memory_object_data_return fnord, (continued)
- Re: memory_object_lock_request and memory_object_data_return fnord, Thomas Bushnell, BSG, 2002/03/13
- Re: memory_object_lock_request and memory_object_data_return fnord, Neal H Walfield, 2002/03/13
- Re: memory_object_lock_request and memory_object_data_return fnord, Thomas Bushnell, BSG, 2002/03/13
- Re: memory_object_lock_request and memory_object_data_return fnord, Neal H Walfield, 2002/03/13
- Re: memory_object_lock_request and memory_object_data_return fnord, Thomas Bushnell, BSG, 2002/03/13
- Re: memory_object_lock_request and memory_object_data_return fnord, Neal H Walfield, 2002/03/13
- Re: memory_object_lock_request and memory_object_data_return fnord, Roland McGrath, 2002/03/13
- Re: memory_object_lock_request and memory_object_data_return fnord, Neal H Walfield, 2002/03/23
- Re: memory_object_lock_request and memory_object_data_return fnord, Roland McGrath, 2002/03/24
- Re: memory_object_lock_request and memory_object_data_return fnord, Neal H Walfield, 2002/03/25
- Re: memory_object_lock_request and memory_object_data_return fnord,
Roland McGrath <=
- GNU/Linux binary compatibility (Was: Re: memory_object_lock_request and memory_object_data_return fnord), Jeroen Dekkers, 2002/03/25
- Re: GNU/Linux binary compatibility (Was: Re: memory_object_lock_request and memory_object_data_return fnord), Wolfgang Jährling, 2002/03/25
- Re: GNU/Linux binary compatibility (Was: Re: memory_object_lock_request and memory_object_data_return fnord), Jeff Bailey, 2002/03/25
- Re: GNU/Linux binary compatibility (Was: Re: memory_object_lock_request and memory_object_data_return fnord), Marcus Brinkmann, 2002/03/25
- Re: GNU/Linux binary compatibility (Was: Re: memory_object_lock_request and memory_object_data_return fnord), Oystein Viggen, 2002/03/25
- Re: GNU/Linux binary compatibility (Was: Re: memory_object_lock_request and memory_object_data_return fnord), Jeroen Dekkers, 2002/03/25
- Re: GNU/Linux binary compatibility (Was: Re: memory_object_lock_request and memory_object_data_return fnord), Farid Hajji, 2002/03/25
- Re: GNU/Linux binary compatibility (Was: Re: memory_object_lock_request and memory_object_data_return fnord), Jeroen Dekkers, 2002/03/25
- Re: GNU/Linux binary compatibility (Was: Re: memory_object_lock_request and memory_object_data_return fnord), Oystein Viggen, 2002/03/26
- Re: GNU/Linux binary compatibility (Was: Re: memory_object_lock_request and memory_object_data_return fnord), Jeroen Dekkers, 2002/03/26