On 27/05/2020 19:15, Vineet Gupta wrote: > On 5/27/20 11:26 AM, Adhemerval Zanella via Libc-alpha wrote: >> >> >> On 22/04/2020 22:41, Vineet Gupta via Libc-alpha wrote: >>> This code deals with the ARC ABI. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Vineet Gupta <vgupta@xxxxxxxxxxxx> >> >> We do not use DCO, but rather copyright assignment. > > Right, removed that now. > >> Looks ok in general, with some comments below. > > Thx for taking a look. > >>> +;@ r1 = value that setjmp( ) will return due to this longjmp >> >> Since all .S files are processed by gcc assembly implementation usually >> use C style comment (/* ... */). Same applies to other assembly >> implementations. > > OK, I can update throughout, although I like the small assembler comments which > are on the same line. I don't have a strong preference and I am not sure if there is a strict code guideline for comment in assembly implementations. It was more a suggestion, since other assembly implementations tend to use C style comment as well. >>> diff --git a/sysdeps/arc/memusage.h b/sysdeps/arc/memusage.h > >>> + >>> +#define GETSP() ({ register uintptr_t stack_ptr asm ("sp"); stack_ptr; }) >>> + >>> +#define uatomic32_t unsigned int >> >> Not sure if this is really required now that we are moving to C11 atomic >> model withing glibc itself. Maybe we could just use uint32_t on >> malloc/memusage.c and rely on atomic macros instead. > > But that would be much bigger change, and orthogonal to the port. So perhaps we > add it for now and then do the bigger/sweeping change. > Indeed, it was more a open note for a future cleanup. The current definition is fine as is. _______________________________________________ linux-snps-arc mailing list linux-snps-arc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-snps-arc