This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [PATCH 6/6] qsort comparator consistency checking
- From: Jeff Law <law at redhat dot com>
- To: Alexander Monakov <amonakov at ispras dot ru>
- Cc: gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Wed, 2 Aug 2017 12:08:41 -0600
- Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/6] qsort comparator consistency checking
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- Authentication-results: ext-mx09.extmail.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com
- Authentication-results: ext-mx09.extmail.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com; spf=fail smtp.mailfrom=law at redhat dot com
- Dmarc-filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mx1.redhat.com 5CA314E4C2
- References: <20170715204749.24398-1-amonakov@ispras.ru> <20170715204749.24398-7-amonakov@ispras.ru> <2504f8b1-d25c-08f0-2d8c-ae65d04070ab@redhat.com> <alpine.LNX.2.20.13.1708022055410.12138@monopod.intra.ispras.ru>
On 08/02/2017 12:00 PM, Alexander Monakov wrote:
> On Wed, 2 Aug 2017, Jeff Law wrote:
>> Well, there's not *that* many qsort calls. My quick grep shows 94 and
>> its a very mechanical change. Then a poison in system.h to ensure raw
>> calls to qsort don't return.
>
> Any suggestion for the non-poisoned replacement? xqsort? gcc_qsort?
qsort_chk/qsort_nochk for checked and non-checked?
>
> Can you review the rest (the substantial functionality) of the patch
> without waiting for the mass-renaming change?
I think the rest is good as-is. If we find a need to adjust the
checking intervals, then we can do that as a follow-up.
jeff