This is the mail archive of the libc-alpha@sourceware.org mailing list for the glibc project.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
Other format: | [Raw text] |
On Tuesday 03 July 2012 06:19:44 Andreas Krebbel wrote: > On 07/02/2012 04:21 PM, Andreas Jaeger wrote: > > On Monday, July 02, 2012 15:52:49 Andreas Krebbel wrote: > >> On Mon, Jul 02, 2012 at 03:20:30PM +0200, Andreas Jaeger wrote: > >>> So, do you want to add a configure test and only enable the IFUNC > >>> support with new binutils? Or how do you want to handle the > >>> requirement? > >> > >> I'll add a configure check when it is clear which Binutils version > >> will include the support. > > > > I suggest to check for the feature, not for the version, the configure > > file already has support for this, so this might be enough: > > AC_CACHE_CHECK([for assembler gnu_indirect_function symbol type > > support], > > libc_cv_asm_gnu_indirect_function, [dnl > > cat > conftest.s <<EOF > > .type foo,%gnu_indirect_function > > EOF > > if ${CC-cc} -c $ASFLAGS conftest.s 1>&AS_MESSAGE_LOG_FD > > 2>&AS_MESSAGE_LOG_FD; > > then > > libc_cv_asm_gnu_indirect_function=yes > > else > > libc_cv_asm_gnu_indirect_function=no > > fi > > rm -f conftest*]) > > This only checks whether the assembler supports gnu_indirect_function as > symbol type not whether the linker actually handles IFUNC symbols for the > target. yes, this has bit us with sparc already for example. people have a new enough binutils that supports ifunc type, but the backend doesn't support it, so we get weird build errors. if we could get a more extensive test here, that'd be awesome. -mike
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |