This is the mail archive of the libc-hacker@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the glibc project.

Note that libc-hacker is a closed list. You may look at the archives of this list, but subscription and posting are not open.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: [PATCH] Nuke another 21 .plt slots

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Roland McGrath wrote:


I don't think it is so unreasonable.
What exactly? That gcc by default is generating code with different semantics based on the optimization level?

> Anything that is written so that it
would work with static linking would work will come out right (i.e. you can
only inline in the same module and it would be a multiple definition if
there were a competing definition elsewhere), except for special cases
defining weak functions.
I have no problem with this being possible. But the user must tell the compiler to do so. There is a lot of code out there which depends on interposition being possible. All optimizations default on the safe side, why not this one as well?

- -- - ---------------. ,-. 1325 Chesapeake Terrace
Ulrich Drepper \ ,-------------------' \ Sunnyvale, CA 94089 USA
Red Hat `--' drepper at redhat.com `------------------------
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQE9T3d62ijCOnn/RHQRAsxlAKChbETqVF7MiHubYxzSugqU8nJ8RACeIunj
3no+m3gkdxDOKdinWmUQYks=
=xmoz
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]