From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v4 1/5] glibc: Perform rseq(2) registration at nptl
 init and thread creation
Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2018 10:51:09 -0500 (EST)
Message-ID: <688718071.12798.1543247469553.JavaMail.zimbra@efficios.com>
References: <20181121183936.8176-1-mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com> <20181123142843.GJ23599@brightrain.aerifal.cx> <1150466925.11664.1542992720871.JavaMail.zimbra@efficios.com> <20181123173019.GK23599@brightrain.aerifal.cx> <865273158.11687.1542995541389.JavaMail.zimbra@efficios.com> <20181123183558.GM23599@brightrain.aerifal.cx> <1758017676.12041.1543007347347.JavaMail.zimbra@efficios.com> <87bm6cqm31.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
In-Reply-To: <87bm6cqm31.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
To: Florian Weimer <fweimer@redhat.com>
Cc: Rich Felker <dalias@libc.org>, carlos <carlos@redhat.com>, Joseph Myers <joseph@codesourcery.com>, Szabolcs Nagy <szabolcs.nagy@arm.com>, libc-alpha <libc-alpha@sourceware.org>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>, Ben Maurer <bmaurer@fb.com>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>, "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>, Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>, Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>, Dave Watson <davejwatson@fb.com>, Paul Turner <pjt@google.com>, linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, linux-api <linux-api@vger.kernel.org>
List-Id: linux-api@vger.kernel.org

----- On Nov 26, 2018, at 3:28 AM, Florian Weimer fweimer@redhat.com wrote:

> * Mathieu Desnoyers:
> 
>> Using a "weak" symbol in early adopter libraries is important, so they
>> can be loaded together into the same process without causing loader
>> errors due to many definitions of the same strong symbol.
> 
> This is not how ELF dynamic linking works.  If the symbol name is the
> same, one definition interposes the others.
> 
> You need to ensure that the symbol has the same size everywhere, though.
> There are some tricky interactions with symbol versions, too.  (The
> interposing libraries must not use symbol versioning.)

I was under the impression that loading the same strong symbol into an
application multiple times would cause some kind of warning if non-weak. I did
some testing to figure out which case I remembered would cause this.

When compiling with "-fno-common", dynamic and static linking work fine, but
trying to add multiple instances of a given symbol into a single object fails
with:

/tmp/ccSakXZV.o:(.bss+0x0): multiple definition of `a'
/tmp/ccQBJBOo.o:(.bss+0x0): first defined here

Even if the symbol has the same size.

So considering that we don't care about compiling into a single object here,
and only care about static and dynamic linking of libraries, indeed the "weak"
symbol is not useful.

So let's make __rseq_abi and __rseq_refcount strong symbols then ?

Thanks,

Mathieu

-- 
Mathieu Desnoyers
EfficiOS Inc.
http://www.efficios.com