Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754988AbXKDRqN (ORCPT ); Sun, 4 Nov 2007 12:46:13 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752318AbXKDRqF (ORCPT ); Sun, 4 Nov 2007 12:46:05 -0500 Received: from smtp2.linux-foundation.org ([207.189.120.14]:40168 "EHLO smtp2.linux-foundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752186AbXKDRqE (ORCPT ); Sun, 4 Nov 2007 12:46:04 -0500 Date: Sun, 4 Nov 2007 09:45:42 -0800 (PST) From: Linus Torvalds To: Bart Van Assche cc: Andrew Haley , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Tomash Brechko Subject: Re: Is gcc thread-unsafe? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: <18210.2314.57767.962503@zebedee.pink> <18215.1394.294830.944162@zebedee.pink> <18219.17505.443550.620503@zebedee.pink> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=us-ascii Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 887 Lines: 21 On Sun, 4 Nov 2007, Bart Van Assche wrote: > > Has it already been decided who will do this audit, and when this > audit will happen ? Has a target date been set when this audit should > be complete, or is the completion of this audit a requirement for the > release of a specific gcc version ? I am told that the gcc people realized that was indeed a bug (people were able to show problems even in non-threaded environments with mprotect()), and have now fixed it in the current gcc sources. That still leaves the old versions with potential problems, but I think it makes it much less interesting to audit for these things. Linus - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/