From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 24080 invoked by alias); 14 Nov 2014 01:12:20 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 24065 invoked by uid 89); 14 Nov 2014 01:12:19 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES256-GCM-SHA384 encrypted) ESMTPS; Fri, 14 Nov 2014 01:12:18 +0000 Received: from int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.22]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id sAE1CGmu024467 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=FAIL); Thu, 13 Nov 2014 20:12:17 -0500 Received: from [10.3.113.31] (ovpn-113-31.phx2.redhat.com [10.3.113.31]) by int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id sAE1CGAP011760; Thu, 13 Nov 2014 20:12:16 -0500 Message-ID: <546556ED.8060808@redhat.com> Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2014 01:23:00 -0000 From: Jeff Law User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: enh , Alexander Ivchenko , GCC Patches CC: Andrew Hsieh Subject: Re: [Android] Enable ifuncs on Android References: <5464EC1A.6070709@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2014-11/txt/msg01623.txt.bz2 On 11/13/14 10:46, enh wrote: > This feels like a bad idea to me simply because a new compiler with an > old runtime will generate code that fails, right? > > > yes, but that's already true of PIE or gnu-style hash or... That doesn't make it the right thing to do. I would argue that's a bug that really needs to be fixed. > > If you can't do a configure-time test, then the way to go is either a > compile-time option, or to use a different target. If there's some > minimum version of android that has this capability, then this isn't > terribly hard. You may not even need a config file for this since you > could define LIBC_BIONIC_USE_IFUNCS or something like that when > configured for a suitably new android version. > > > this won't make any difference to the developers, though. they get their > prebuilt compilers from us, and we'll just turn all the latest options > on. we don't ship a compilers for each Android version. we already have > 6 architectures * {clang,gcc} * {current,previous}version to ship. But that's no reason to have a compiler which produces bogus binaries. I really think this patch is a bad idea. jeff