linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3/3] rcutorture/nolibc: add a bit of documentation to explain how to use nolibc

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20181229175502.GA12726@1wt.eu>
Date:   Sat, 29 Dec 2018 18:55:02 +0100
From:   Willy Tarreau <w@....eu>
To:     Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>
Cc:     mingo@...nel.org, paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] rcutorture/nolibc: add a bit of documentation to
 explain how to use nolibc

Hi Randy,

On Sat, Dec 29, 2018 at 08:50:09AM -0800, Randy Dunlap wrote:
> This is a good summary IMO.  Thanks.
> And it's in good shape -- doesn't *require* any fixes.
> But if you do make any changes to it, here are a few suggestions.  :)

Thanks very much.

> > + * This file is designed to be used as a libc alternative for minimal programs
> > + * with very limited requirements. It consists of a small number of syscall and
> > + * types definitions, and the minimal startup code needed to call main().
> 
>       type

Funny, I hesitated on this one and "fixed" it :-)

> > + * All syscalls are declared as static functions so that they can be optimized
> > + * away by the compiler when not used.
> > + *
> > + * Syscalls are split between 3 levels :
> 
> Instead of "between", use either "among" or "into".  and then "levels:".

Will do, thanks.

> > + *   - the lower level is the arch-specific syscall() definition, consisting in
> > + *     assembly code in compound expressions. These ones are called
> 
> Apparently "these ones" is acceptable in UK English, not so in US English.

Oh I didn't know, I've used it quite a bit in the last decades, thinking
it was a valid plural for "this one". It seems like I should use "These"
instead, feel free to suggest otherwise.

> I don't like it, but we do accept UK English here.  :)

I prefer to be corrected and to avoid using bad English, whether it's
US or UK, as much as I hate to make mistakes in French.

> > + * Some stdint-like integer types are defined. These ones are valid on all
> 
>                                                   These are valid on all

OK, makes sense according to the point above.

> ciao.  thanks.

I'm applying the changes right now to my local tree and will respin a
version. Thank you!

Willy