Re: [RFC PATCH v1 0/8] nolibc signal handling support

[Ammar Faizi]

On 12/27/22 1:26 PM, Willy Tarreau wrote:
> Yes, and quite frankly I prefer to make that the least complicated.
> Doing just a simple loop in the _start code is trivial. The main
> concern was to store the data. Till now we had an optional .bss
> section, we didn't save environ and errno was optional. But let's
> be honest, while it does allow for writing the smallest programs,
> most programs will have at least one global variable and will get
> this section anyway, so we don't save anything in practice. This
> concern used to be valid when I was making tiny executables when
> running on floppies where each byte mattered, but now that's pointless.
>
> Thus what I'm proposing is to switch to weak symbol definitions for
> errno, environ, and auxv. I did a quick test to make sure that the same
> symbol was properly used when accessed from two units and that's OK, I'm
> seeing the same instance for all of them (which is better than the current
> situation where errno is static, hence per-unit).

Looks good to me.

> Thus now my focus will be on storing these variables where relevant
> for all archs, so that your getauxval() implementation works on top
> of it. It will be much cleaner and will also improve programs' ease
> of implementation and reliability.

Are you going to wire up a patchset for it?

If so, I'll wait for it. When it's already committed, I'll base this
series on top it.

Or I take your series locally then submit your patches and mine in a
single series.

What do you prefer?

--
Ammar Faizi