From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.133.124]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5F3D3331A44 for ; Wed, 7 Jan 2026 17:31:02 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=170.10.133.124 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1767807065; cv=none; b=UO7MvsZx8E2LVUYEtDxrT9UGObeiwqGmQ5LVOHIeIZnpCbXQ4NTd9GGihbpJxgAhYGw5t1jTYiRrqJZIL3SDjMiCoxNy7hs97/QCOlSQcBrISG8qTHuJP8bg+3OjiwnpjQlLHIo1rJnXnPqAz2hhPDdJ+lpLRBX7dbSM37XQ2RM= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1767807065; c=relaxed/simple; bh=+Urhayi0hgSwsQXenEOzLXBD86vTzoCCR1o1WEgxLMk=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=iyap7lamVRq21qssxMaI0/DXU9Fdokvb8FHTy81BC6dNr0JZCYerGF08OzgO0RE8okqQCL4pPYZMPiwM6EwcxpyyfXmVjLw0/SbNofWgPNmtZ3uD8j+sKpOvNqVelekpTLNXLpvq6eDyp2YhXaXgu1Wskt9GQG+tMnyZgGm+yww= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=redhat.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b=L5uWwZmO; arc=none smtp.client-ip=170.10.133.124 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b="L5uWwZmO" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1767807059; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=pwtZ5DANqgIxib8CR2DVi/wj3I9enaTzYUYnQpPxd0A=; b=L5uWwZmO0+gH+BDXbe9bwJ7Gg1L6XVO7VH/XIPEDUs4m13lWzD4NPDKKi1PnMIPHAYXIaA ncXeYNCpydPCmPADC5ePJGUKjAdxYbRbcIxA5qo7a1cuGY7PaQZISg9Nb3zBnZvmy0l7lb EH86mhRjSqV8lGMN4i9CCAyVXN8qqCg= Received: from mx-prod-mc-01.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (ec2-54-186-198-63.us-west-2.compute.amazonaws.com [54.186.198.63]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-490-RO8VWYfOOhOp3BMMRbdJaA-1; Wed, 07 Jan 2026 12:30:55 -0500 X-MC-Unique: RO8VWYfOOhOp3BMMRbdJaA-1 X-Mimecast-MFC-AGG-ID: RO8VWYfOOhOp3BMMRbdJaA_1767807054 Received: from mx-prod-int-03.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (mx-prod-int-03.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com [10.30.177.12]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mx-prod-mc-01.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 629621954B14; Wed, 7 Jan 2026 17:30:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: from fweimer-oldenburg.csb.redhat.com (unknown [10.45.224.37]) by mx-prod-int-03.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CAAB419560A7; Wed, 7 Jan 2026 17:30:49 +0000 (UTC) From: Florian Weimer To: David Svoboda Cc: Alejandro Colomar , Robert Seacord , "sc22wg14@open-std. org" , Carlos O'Donell , Aaron Ballman , "libc-alpha@sourceware.org" , "musl@lists.openwall.com" , "linux-man@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: [SC22WG14.34664] n3752, alx-0029r8 - Restore the traditional realloc(3) specification In-Reply-To: (David Svoboda's message of "Wed, 7 Jan 2026 14:31:31 +0000") References: <20251223161139.196AB356CF9@www.open-std.org> <20251223164349.F0BC5356D1A@www.open-std.org> <20251223211529.6365A356CF9@www.open-std.org> <20260106210527.AA3FA356D3A@www.open-std.org> <20260106214930.A5C8E356D2B@www.open-std.org> Date: Wed, 07 Jan 2026 18:30:47 +0100 Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-man@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 3.0 on 10.30.177.12 * David Svoboda: > WRT this text: > > Code written for platforms returning a null pointer can be > =E2=80=82=E2=80=82=E2=80=82=E2=80=82=E2=80=82=E2=80=82migrated to platfor= ms returning non-null, without significant > =E2=80=82=E2=80=82=E2=80=82=E2=80=82=E2=80=82=E2=80=82issues. > > I am very skeptical that this is indeed true. But to be precise, this > is Glibc's problem rather than WG14's. If they are willing to change > glibc to return non-null on realloc(0), then I am willing to agree to > this change in ISO C. If glibc makes the change, it becomes the problem of our users (and developers who interpose glibc's malloc). I'm not sure that's a helpful approach. Someone needs to take responsibility. For glibc, we would have to do some analysis to figure out the impact. I don't think the glibc team at Red Hat will be able to work on this in the foreseeable future. I don't we should make such changes upstream without such an analysis. What's Microsoft's position on this entire topic? I thought they use the glibc behavior, too? Thanks, Florian