On Thu, 13 Nov 2014, Ilya Enkovich wrote: > It's hard to decide which of runtime functionality should be > considered as basic and how it should be used. We may say that the > only basic thing is hardware enabling which is enable_mpx and stop > here. But then you get minimal but quite useless library. Yes, it > can enable MPX and thus make bounds violation to interrupt a program. > But users cannot enable/disable MPX dinamycally then. Also they > cannot configure it. Thus either control via environmental variables > appears in this core library or we transform initialization function > from constructor to interface function and use it from another > extended MPX library which support environment variables, logging etc. > But the core library will only be used by this extended MPX library > and nothing else. So why not to leave it as a single library as it is?
You can leave it as a single library - it's just that imposes libgcc-like constraints on what the library does and how it does things, so as to be usable for arbitrary programs built with MPX (e.g. using reserved-namespace names such as __write when available - direct syscalls may also be a possibility in some cases). -- Joseph S. Myers jos...@codesourcery.com
