From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 13417 invoked by alias); 29 Apr 2014 23:48:23 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 13395 invoked by uid 89); 29 Apr 2014 23:48:22 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-0.6 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_05,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_PASS,URIBL_SBL autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: mail-ob0-f174.google.com Received: from mail-ob0-f174.google.com (HELO mail-ob0-f174.google.com) (209.85.214.174) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES128-SHA encrypted) ESMTPS; Tue, 29 Apr 2014 23:48:21 +0000 Received: by mail-ob0-f174.google.com with SMTP id gq1so1121707obb.5 for ; Tue, 29 Apr 2014 16:48:20 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=yEyPxFgbp/GdIL/Mgz06HebBDPam11khqqe3jrjN/zA=; b=X1VTT2VNfwygIwN9dhH1RbJ4MT52SUXHJdgfk/mWuwFBKqMaF0bgUHIDE41lRviJ17 nObcbHOnrUJSJ1OG22cMc+CnNQo1wTu33OXrIo2pV3MWTVkd+cp+eYxGsF6tO5pY9nzd vKOOzCTESQh3ZGg3vfLVsRuUSnixlEE1rjJm/BNctA51OgFiMCb8uTaVm6++TOK446lE iXTAYScztimWCVnLXZX/xTNkSX1qak7S1NVIvB4Gq536SMDTr6weKtQy7HI6nNDBzW// jlFUC3CVaHNWiijvqV8knGeF460E0iPrnbUhMjpG9DGoiqWQ/P8ih0F/iNBXSNNVyorA Oehg== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQlYzxET+Xc5wfnqA36Hj+3ZqzDWc1XCg3RQ8QL95X1CVOP6kp8CL/hPoqzrwkd3rN6EconwNYS8XExWjWW4sAtBlGbQpX7SUzoiYCUDQUoQdL+13sHPXG72txYyAbJT8m34inmTMNXwLYnhZVfGqsyF3tYFi+79SOwUDmlqXNEptiuMGozndcsNbPwYBHDgEkUxKdP1LdvdRpI6CDntYWPqFin0MA== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.182.78.100 with SMTP id a4mr686844obx.56.1398815299926; Tue, 29 Apr 2014 16:48:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.60.118.39 with HTTP; Tue, 29 Apr 2014 16:48:19 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <535FF173.2060008@marino.st> References: <5352D100.9040108@marino.st> <53541A34.7050908@marino.st> <535FC71E.8070406@marino.st> <535FF173.2060008@marino.st> Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2014 23:48:00 -0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PING] Contributing new gcc targets: i386-*-dragonfly and x86-64-*-dragonfly From: Ian Lance Taylor To: John Marino Cc: gcc-patches , "libstdc++" , Binutils , gdb-patches@sourceware.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-SW-Source: 2014-04/txt/msg00631.txt.bz2 On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 2:37 PM, John Marino wrote: > >> I don't understand the benefit of libgcc/enable-execute-stack-bsd.c. >> The code seems the same as the existing >> libgcc/enable-execute-stack-mprotect.c. All you are changing is >> omitting need_enable_exec_stack. If you just drop the FreeBSD >> constructor, you will get the behaviour you want. > > With the caveat that this patch is over 2 years old, I just took a look > at both files. I would have not needed to modify this file at all for > DragonFly. In fact, I seem to recall that I didn't modify it for > DragonFly, but rather for FreeBSD. If I had to guess, it would be that > I found mprotect() was needed regardless of value of kern.stackprot. I > must have traced some test failures back to this. > > Which I guess that's what you mean - just delete the block between "#if > defined __FreeBSD__" and the next #elif which should be equivalent. I > can tweak the patch set to do that. Yes. > And what about the dl_iterate_phdr changes? Do they look good to you? They looked fine to me but I'm not a build system maintainer. Ian