Re: gcc-3.4.X + glibc segfault

[Daniel Kegel <dank at kegel dot com>]

Jake Page wrote:
> The thing that was baffling me was that a nearly identical piece of code 
> was generated correctly in the same file.  I fianlly tracked it down to 
> the multiple different ways glibc declares weak references:
>
> /*  used by __pthread_initialize in glibc - works fine */
> extern void __weak_one(void) __attribute__ ((weak));
>
> /* works with gcc-3.4.1 IF used... */
> extern void __weak_two (void);
> #pragma weak __weak_two
>
> /* used by __pthread_mutex_init in glibc (for mips at least)
>    BAD in gcc-3.4.1 ! */
> extern void __weak_three (void);
> asm(".weak " "__weak_three");
>
> I'm assuming the problem is a 'trivial' dead code removal 
> optimization -  since gcc doesn't know anything about the contect of the 
> "asm()" statement, if assumes that the "__weak_three" symbol is non-zero, 
> and optimized out a check like "if (__weak_three != NULL)"
>
> I noticed that glibc-2.3.2 has a more complicated system for declaring 
> weak references - I will test this with it when I get the chance...
> Will also put together a patch for glibc-2.2.5 to use #pragma instead of 
> asm() (since I've been using 2.2.5 previously, and am not sure I want to 
> upgrade yet...)

Quick question: have you tested glibc-2.3.2 yet?

If you find a fix for glibc-2.2.5, I'd be happy to include it
(especially if it's a simple backport from glibc-2.3.2...)
- Dan

------
Want more information?  See the CrossGCC FAQ, http://www.objsw.com/CrossGCC/
Want to unsubscribe? Send a note to crossgcc-unsubscribe@sources.redhat.com