Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S934031AbYCFORT (ORCPT ); Thu, 6 Mar 2008 09:17:19 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1756036AbYCFORI (ORCPT ); Thu, 6 Mar 2008 09:17:08 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([66.187.233.31]:55564 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752001AbYCFORF (ORCPT ); Thu, 6 Mar 2008 09:17:05 -0500 Message-ID: <47CFFC64.7040703@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 06 Mar 2008 14:15:00 +0000 From: Andrew Haley User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.12 (X11/20080213) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Olivier Galibert , Paolo Bonzini , "H. Peter Anvin" , Chris Lattner , Michael Matz , Richard Guenther , Joe Buck , Jan Hubicka , Aurelien Jarno , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, gcc@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: RELEASE BLOCKER: Linux doesn't follow x86/x86-64 ABI wrt direction flag References: <84fc9c000803051332q2f2eedeej7d3c0509e698cabf@mail.gmail.com> <47CF11D6.7070901@zytor.com> <738B72DB-A1D6-43F8-813A-E49688D05771@apple.com> <2F47E21A-9055-4EC3-99CF-B666BBC045C3@apple.com> <47CF3F09.4080606@zytor.com> <578FCA7D-D7A6-44F6-9310-4A97C13CDCBE@apple.com> <47CF44E7.3020106@zytor.com> <20080306135139.GA5236@dspnet.fr.eu.org> <47CFF9A3.30309@gnu.org> <20080306141221.GC5236@dspnet.fr.eu.org> In-Reply-To: <20080306141221.GC5236@dspnet.fr.eu.org> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1050 Lines: 25 Olivier Galibert wrote: > On Thu, Mar 06, 2008 at 03:03:15PM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote: >> Olivier Galibert wrote: >>> On Wed, Mar 05, 2008 at 05:12:07PM -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote: >>>> It's a kernel bug, and it needs to be fixed. >>> I'm not convinced. It's been that way for 15 years, it's that way in >>> the BSD kernels, at that point it's a feature. The bug is in the >>> documentation, nowhere else. And in gcc for blindly trusting the >>> documentation. >> No, the bug *in the kernel* was already present (if you had a signal >> raised during a call to memmove). It's just more visible with GCC 4.3. > > I'm curious, since when paper documentation became the Truth and > reality became a bug? Isn't that the definition of a bug? That a program does not meet its specification? Andrew. -- 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/