[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAH9TF6ODs4oLDHSfOOpF6_9hV7bocmVA6sNz_3oC+hS6P4RfEw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 7 Dec 2024 19:47:38 +0100
From: Alex Rønne Petersen <alex@...xrp.com>
To: Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org>
Cc: musl@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] clone: clear the frame pointer in the child
process on relevant ports
On Sat, Dec 7, 2024 at 6:04 AM Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Dec 06, 2024 at 07:48:53PM +0100, Alex Rønne Petersen wrote:
> > This just mirrors what is done in the start code for the affected ports, as well
> > as what is already done for the three x86 ports. For consistency, I also changed
> > the x86 ports and the powerpc port to have the child process portion at the end
> > of clone().
>
> Can you submit without this independent change? Readers of history
> should be able to confirm that the patch does not make any other
> functional change, and it's hard to do that when reorganizing code is
> mixed with the change.
Can do. Should I send it as a separate patch or would you rather I
just omit that particular change?
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.
