[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Sun, 07 Nov 2021 19:20:21 +0100
From: Florian Weimer <fweimer@...hat.com>
To: James Y Knight <jyknight@...gle.com>
Cc: musl@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: add noexcept to all functions please
* James Y. Knight:
> Glibc defines macros for this purpose, which expand into "throw()" in
> C++ and "__attribute__((__nothrow__))" in GCC-C. The latter is only
> useful in conjunction with an extremely-rarely-used feature, C code
> built with -fexceptions enabled, and is thus probably ignorable.
We build our distributions with -fexceptions
-fasynchronous-unwind-tables. These features have real uses out there
(although -fasynchronous-unwind-tables is probably more important for
performance analysis and diagnostics). With glibc, -fexceptions is
desirable to avoid unprotected function pointers on the stack in
conjunction with POSIX cancellation handlers (which can be relevant even
if unwinding does not happen).
I believe the musl cancellation implementation does not use DWARF
unwinding. I do not know if it cancellation handlers have the same
hardening gap as glibc's with setjmp-based unwinding.
Thanks,
Florian
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
