public inbox for glibc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "bugdal at aerifal dot cx" <sourceware-bugzilla@sourceware.org>
To: glibc-bugs@sourceware.org
Subject: [Bug libc/15767] New: C++ ABI inconsistency for fpos_t on 64-bit archs
Date: Sun, 21 Jul 2013 19:21:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <bug-15767-131@http.sourceware.org/bugzilla/> (raw)

http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15767

            Bug ID: 15767
           Summary: C++ ABI inconsistency for fpos_t on 64-bit archs
           Product: glibc
           Version: unspecified
            Status: NEW
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P2
         Component: libc
          Assignee: unassigned at sourceware dot org
          Reporter: bugdal at aerifal dot cx
                CC: drepper.fsp at gmail dot com

On 64-bit archs, -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 should not affect the C++ ABI (name
mangling). Regardless of whether there's an official policy to this effect, it
makes sense, since some applications will always compile with
-D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 and others will attempt to detect whether they need it
before adding it.

For most types that change definition according to _FILE_OFFSET_BITS, there is
an underlying type name independent of the typedef name, and no issue arises.
However, fpos_t is defined to a structure with no tag, and thus the original
typedef name of either _G_fpos_t or _G_fpos64_t gets used in name mangling.
Thus if a C++ library uses fpos_t as part of its public interface, and the
library and application are compiled with different values of
_FILE_OFFSET_BITS, the ABI will gratuitously mismatch. On 32-bit archs it
should be expected to mismatch, and the library would have a policy that you
have to build with 64-bit off_t. But on 64-bit archs, it should not matter
whether _FILE_OFFSET_BITS was defined. This issue would be even more of a
problem if multiple libraries disagreed on whether it was supposed to be set,
and an application needed to use both libraries.

With that said, I'm not sure why features.h doesn't make _FILE_OFFSET_BITS a
complete no-op on 64-bit archs. That would make the issue go away entirely.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.


             reply	other threads:[~2013-07-21 19:21 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-07-21 19:21 bugdal at aerifal dot cx [this message]
2013-07-21 20:34 ` [Bug libc/15767] " schwab@linux-m68k.org
2013-07-21 22:09 ` joseph at codesourcery dot com
2014-06-13 13:20 ` fweimer 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-15767-131@http.sourceware.org/bugzilla/ \
    --to=sourceware-bugzilla@sourceware.org \
    --cc=glibc-bugs@sourceware.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: link
Be 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).