This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: [RFC/PATCH] ARM: VDSO support
- From: Joseph Myers <joseph at codesourcery dot com>
- To: Adhemerval Zanella <adhemerval dot zanella at linaro dot org>
- Cc: <libc-alpha at sourceware dot org>
- Date: Tue, 7 Apr 2015 20:06:11 +0000
- Subject: Re: [RFC/PATCH] ARM: VDSO support
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <1428081934-22419-1-git-send-email-nathan_lynch at codesourcery dot com> <alpine dot DEB dot 2 dot 10 dot 1504071643550 dot 20250 at digraph dot polyomino dot org dot uk> <55240E78 dot 7020807 at linaro dot org> <alpine dot DEB dot 2 dot 10 dot 1504071714020 dot 20250 at digraph dot polyomino dot org dot uk> <alpine dot DEB dot 2 dot 10 dot 1504071717330 dot 20250 at digraph dot polyomino dot org dot uk> <55242832 dot 1090001 at linaro dot org>
On Tue, 7 Apr 2015, Adhemerval Zanella wrote:
> So I think a possible cleanup can start as:
>
> 1. Add INLINE_VSYSCALL for arch that does not define it
>
> 2. Add a sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/gettimeofday.c that uses the INLINE_VSYSCALL
>
> 3. aarch64/tile/s390 can be removed by 2.
>
> 4. The IFUNC cleanup will require some work. It can be use
> ./sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/x86/gettimeofday.c as base and if a arch want to
> use it my define USE_IFUNC (or something else) and define the FALLBACK
> mechanism for case where vDSO is not available.
>
> What do you think?
Seems plausible to me. The case of IFUNCs not necessarily being supported
on some architectures is one that does need architecture differences
(beyond the choice of whether there is a VDSO at all), but I don't see an
obvious need for other differences.
--
Joseph S. Myers
joseph@codesourcery.com