This is the mail archive of the
libc-ports@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the libc-ports project.
Re: powerpc-nofpu ABI baselines
- From: "Joseph S. Myers" <joseph at codesourcery dot com>
- To: libc-ports at sourceware dot org
- Cc: "Ryan S. Arnold" <ryan dot arnold at gmail dot com>
- Date: Wed, 16 May 2012 21:37:18 +0000 (UTC)
- Subject: Re: powerpc-nofpu ABI baselines
- References: <Pine.LNX.4.64.1205162119220.32674@digraph.polyomino.org.uk>
Now for the trickier differences in the ABI between the fpu and nofpu
cases. I would welcome comments on the correct handling of these.
diff -ruN nptl-fpu/libc.abilist nptl/libc.abilist
--- nptl-fpu/libc.abilist 2012-05-16 12:42:09.552250925 -0700
+++ nptl/libc.abilist 2012-05-16 14:00:26.162292503 -0700
@@ -267,7 +267,6 @@
_libc_intl_domainname D 0x5
_longjmp F
_mcleanup F
- _mcount F
_nl_default_dirname D 0x12
_nl_domain_bindings D 0x4
_nl_msg_cat_cntr D 0x4
This is bug 14042, applying to nofpu as to fpu. Clearly this change
should not be made to the checked in baseline.
@@ -1845,6 +1844,31 @@
__xpg_sigpause F
__xstat64 F
_flushlbf F
+ _q_add F
[...]
See <http://sourceware.org/ml/libc-ports/2007-10/msg00004.html>. These
functions are in GLIBC_2.2 version but would not have been in glibc 2.2
and would never actually have been useful. Do we want to record them as
part of the GLIBC_2.2 ABI to preserve, or remove them?
diff -ruN nptl-fpu/libm.abilist nptl/libm.abilist
--- nptl-fpu/libm.abilist 2012-05-16 12:42:09.552250925 -0700
+++ nptl/libm.abilist 2012-05-16 14:00:26.162292503 -0700
@@ -163,7 +163,6 @@
__clog10l F
__fe_dfl_env D 0x8
__fe_enabled_env D 0x8
- __fe_nomask_env F
__fe_nonieee_env D 0x8
__finite F
__finitef F
This really was in libm as of 2.5. My guess is that it disappeared as a
result of:
2007-04-30 Steven Munroe <sjmunroe@us.ibm.com>
Peter Bergner <bergner@us.ibm.com>
[...]
* sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/powerpc/powerpc32/fe_nomask.c: Moved to...
* sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/powerpc/powerpc32/fpu/fe_nomask.c: ...here.
[...]
and
2007-07-13 Steven Munroe <sjmunroe@us.ibm.com>
* sysdeps/powerpc/nofpu/Makefile: Remove fe_nomask from libm-support.
It wouldn't actually have worked for nofpu. Should we keep the removal
from the GLIBC_2.1 ABI, or add back a stub version that sets errno to
ENOSYS (i.e. includes sysdeps/powerpc/fpu/fe_nomask.c, which does just
that)? (Note that sysdeps/powerpc/bits/fenv.h - shared by fpu and nofpu
configurations to facilitate multilib configurations - declares both
__fe_mask_env and __fe_nomask_env. But __fe_mask_env is in no Versions
file so will not be exported from libm for fpu configurations either.)
--
Joseph S. Myers
joseph@codesourcery.com