This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: RFC: PATCHES: Properly handle reference to protected data on x86
- From: Joseph Myers <joseph at codesourcery dot com>
- To: "H.J. Lu" <hjl dot tools at gmail dot com>
- Cc: GCC Patches <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>, GNU C Library <libc-alpha at sourceware dot org>, Binutils <binutils at sourceware dot org>
- Date: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 18:29:15 +0000
- Subject: Re: RFC: PATCHES: Properly handle reference to protected data on x86
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <CAMe9rOoKS4BwBSd2T+bcchYOykZ7Gzh2jCMC5J6r0qyEX1u0_Q at mail dot gmail dot com>
On Wed, 4 Mar 2015, H.J. Lu wrote:
> Protected symbol means that it can't be pre-emptied. It
> doesn't mean its address won't be external. This is true
> for pointer to protected function. With copy relocation,
> address of protected data defined in the shared library may
> also be external. We only know that for sure at run-time.
> Here are patches for glibc, binutils and GCC to handle it
> Any comments?
I don't see any testcases in the glibc patch; it seems critical to have
sufficient testcases to make it easy for architecture maintainers to tell
if there is an issue for their architecture (and the testcases need to
have clear comments explaining any requirements on GCC and binutils for
them to work - that is, comments referring to committed patches or
releases rather than to anything uncommitted).
Joseph S. Myers