[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <5038693C.2020101@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 25 Aug 2012 11:57:16 +0600
From: agent <agentprog@...il.com>
To: musl@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: build musl with clang
25.08.2012 06:09, Rich Felker пишет:
> Here's an idea for a workaround:
>
> void *not_called_malloc(size_t) __asm__("malloc");
> #define malloc not_called_malloc
>
> If that fixes it, it would be an amusing way to present it in the bug
> report.
>
> Rich
that is stilled optimized for a plain malloc call even if i call
not_called_malloc directly and not via a macro. to test the bug i used
the following function:
void *foo(size_t n) {
static char buf[200];
return buf + 10;
}
and that was the way when 'if' was not optimized out. if i use malloc in
foo() it is still wiped out.
as far as i know, optimizations are done not only in clang itself but in
llvm too, so maybe if clang does not notice malloc, llvm does.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
