public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "jakub at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug libgcc/109054] _Unwind_GetLanguageSpecificData should have protected visibility Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2023 15:53:22 +0000 [thread overview] Message-ID: <bug-109054-4-eEztPWv9KP@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw) In-Reply-To: <bug-109054-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=109054 Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> --- Protected visibility is always wrong, it is broken by design (or lack thereof). The _Unwind_* APIs are required by the Itanium ABI, and we call various other such functions from libgcc code already (e.g. _Unwind_Find_FDE from _Unwind_FindEnclosingFunction and uw_frame_state_for and others, _Unwind_GetTextRelBase, _Unwind_GetRegionStart, _Unwind_GetDataRelBase, _Unwind_SetGR, _Unwind_SetIP, _Unwind_GetIPInfo and _Unwind_GetCFA from various spots, _Unwind_RaiseException from _Unwind_Resume_or_Rethrow etc.). It is IMHO very bad idea to have 2 different unwinders in the same process with the same exported functions. If you'd like libgcc to call local aliases of these functions instead of those functions, I'm afraid it could break various things, e.g. i?86 glibc exports _Unwind_Find_FDE too and we rely on a single registry for all unwinding.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-03-07 15:53 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2023-03-07 15:39 [Bug libgcc/109054] New: " woodard at redhat dot com 2023-03-07 15:53 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org [this message] 2023-03-07 16:16 ` [Bug libgcc/109054] " jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-03-07 17:42 ` woodard at redhat dot com 2023-03-07 17:49 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2023-03-07 17:58 ` woodard at redhat dot com
Reply instructions: You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email using any one of the following methods: * Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client, and reply-to-all from there: mbox Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style * Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to switches of git-send-email(1): git send-email \ --in-reply-to=bug-109054-4-eEztPWv9KP@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ \ --to=gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org \ --cc=gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org \ /path/to/YOUR_REPLY https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html * If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header via mailto: links, try the mailto: linkBe sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).