ProPolice (was Re: libffi on OpenBSD x86)

[Joe Buck]

On Thu, Oct 21, 2004 at 12:57:34AM +0200, Marc Espie wrote:
> As far as I know, Etoh Hiroaki has made a try, in the past, to see 
> if ProPolice could possibly be integrated in gcc.

RMS has expressed a lot of interest in getting ProPolice or similar
technology in (including beating us up a bit for not dropping everything
and doing it).  There's mudflap, but that isn't really a good replacement
(too much overhead).

> This has not been successful yet.  At times, it can be hard to integrate
> stuff in the FSF tree of gcc. Especially when one doesn't speak good
> english.

I hope that it can be made to work.  It's always difficult to get a
large, intrusive patch into a piece of software as big as gcc; the same
is true of the Linux kernel or anything else.  What has worked in the
past is to figure out if the patch can go in as a series of smaller
chunks that are easier to analyze for correctness.

> I heard through the grapevine, that maybe, the inferior Stackguard might
> make its way into the gcc mainstream

I don't see how that could happen, since as you say it is inferior; also,
I believe it was reviewed at one time for inclusion and found seriously
wanting.

> As far as using ProPolice within OpenBSD has gone, I can tell you it is
> quite a lot of work.  ProPolice by itself works just fine, but it tends
> to exercise bugs in the RTL generation elsewhere...

... and that is why it would take a lot of work to get the patch in.
The reviewers have to be sure that it is safe and correct for all
architectures.