[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87v9nsz5f6.fsf@oldenburg2.str.redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2020 11:32:45 +0100
From: Florian Weimer <fweimer@...hat.com>
To: Szabolcs Nagy <szabolcs.nagy@....com>
Cc: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
Chris Kennelly <ckennelly@...gle.com>, nd@....com,
"Joel Fernandes\, Google" <joel@...lfernandes.org>,
Paul Turner <pjt@...gle.com>,
Carlos O'Donell <codonell@...hat.com>,
libc-alpha <libc-alpha@...rceware.org>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
paulmck <paulmck@...nel.org>, Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>,
Brian Geffon <bgeffon@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: Rseq registration: Google tcmalloc vs glibc
* Szabolcs Nagy:
> On 26/02/2020 18:56, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
>> ----- On Feb 26, 2020, at 12:27 PM, Chris Kennelly ckennelly@...gle.com wrote:
>>> I agree that this could potentially violate inviarants, but
>>> InitFastPerCpu is not intended to be called by the application.
>>
>> OK, explicitly documenting this would be a good thing. In my own projects,
>> I prefix those symbols with double-underscores (__) to indicate that those
>> are not meant to be called by other means than the static inlines in the API.
>
> use a different convention for that, __ prefix is always
> reserved for the implementation for arbitrary use.
tcmalloc is *not* the implementation in that sense. It must not use the
__ prefix for its identifiers.
Thanks,
Florian
Powered by blists - more mailing lists