From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail.pbcl.net ([88.198.119.4] helo=hetzner.pbcl.net) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1THcCp-0001hE-Sk for openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org; Fri, 28 Sep 2012 17:10:20 +0200 Received: from elite.brightsigndigital.co.uk ([81.142.160.137] helo=[172.30.1.145]) by hetzner.pbcl.net with esmtpsa (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1THc0N-0000sH-Rp; Fri, 28 Sep 2012 16:57:28 +0200 From: Phil Blundell To: Mark Hatle Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2012 15:57:21 +0100 In-Reply-To: <5065B5BB.6080108@windriver.com> References: <1348485983-8294-1-git-send-email-andrei.adrianx.dinu@intel.com> <1348486253.31293.28.camel@phil-desktop> <506054A0.6090309@intel.com> <1348825951.32611.30.camel@phil-desktop> <5065ACC4.7080505@windriver.com> <1348840977.32611.51.camel@phil-desktop> <5065B5BB.6080108@windriver.com> X-Mailer: Evolution 3.0.2- Message-ID: <1348844247.32611.54.camel@phil-desktop> Mime-Version: 1.0 Cc: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] eglibc: Fix for dynamic linker broken offset X-BeenThere: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list List-Id: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2012 15:10:20 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Fri, 2012-09-28 at 09:35 -0500, Mark Hatle wrote: > On 9/28/12 9:02 AM, Phil Blundell wrote: > > On Fri, 2012-09-28 at 08:57 -0500, Mark Hatle wrote: > >> On 9/28/12 4:52 AM, Phil Blundell wrote: > >>> On Mon, 2012-09-24 at 15:40 +0300, Andrei Dinu wrote: > >>>> On 09/24/2012 02:30 PM, Phil Blundell wrote: > >>>>> On Mon, 2012-09-24 at 14:26 +0300, Andrei Dinu wrote: > >>>>>> +- *reloc_addr += sym->st_value; > >>>>>> ++ *reloc_addr = sym->st_value; > >>>>> That patch looks slightly dubious to me. Are you sure this doesn't > >>>>> introduce any regressions elsewhere? > >>>>> > >>>> I have insufficient data to affirm that it doesn't introduces regressions. > >>> > >>> Presumably it does at least pass the eglibc and binutils testsuites, > >>> right? > >> > >> That patch is a workaround for an ARM issue related to thread local storage and > >> TLS offsets during runtime and prelinking. > > > > Right, I understand that. But this doesn't really answer the question > > "does the workaround break anything else?". > > In my testing no. But I never integrated it with OE, so I never ran the test > suite Khem was referring to. I think the testsuite Khem mentioned is just eglibc's builtin tests; it isn't actually specific to OE. What did your testing consist of? p.