From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.133.124]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 926403858412 for ; Mon, 25 Oct 2021 18:22:07 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org 926403858412 Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-96-c5GsbXw5M_Ci-C_StpJaaw-1; Mon, 25 Oct 2021 14:22:04 -0400 X-MC-Unique: c5GsbXw5M_Ci-C_StpJaaw-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx07.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.22]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 20E70362F8; Mon, 25 Oct 2021 18:22:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: from oldenburg.str.redhat.com (unknown [10.39.194.250]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 084C91037F46; Mon, 25 Oct 2021 18:22:01 +0000 (UTC) From: Florian Weimer To: "Lucas A. M. Magalhaes via Libc-alpha" Cc: "Lucas A. M. Magalhaes" , tuliom@linux.ibm.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] powerpc: Use the correct flag for 32-bit known libraries References: <20211022211201.983646-1-lamm@linux.ibm.com> Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2021 20:22:00 +0200 In-Reply-To: <20211022211201.983646-1-lamm@linux.ibm.com> (Lucas A. M. Magalhaes via Libc-alpha's message of "Fri, 22 Oct 2021 18:12:01 -0300") Message-ID: <87r1c9rmlz.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.84 on 10.5.11.22 X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.4 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, DKIM_VALID_EF, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_NONE, TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on server2.sourceware.org X-BeenThere: libc-alpha@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Libc-alpha mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2021 18:22:09 -0000 * Lucas A. M. Magalhaes via Libc-alpha: > In systems with more versions of the known libraries, i.e. on IBM > Advance Toolchain, ldconfig will order them incorrectly on ld.cache. > > The issue only occurs with 32-bit libraries that don't depend on libc or > libm. That's because process_elf32_file check if the elf depends on one > of the libraries at known_libs to select the elf flag. For example, as > libc.so.6 don't depend on itself or on libm it will be flagged as > FLAG_ELF instead of FLAG_LIBC6 as expected. FLAG_ELF_LIBC6 instead of FLAG_LIBC6. I have not looked at this patch in detail. I would prefer if we removed unified cache support for libc.so.4, libc.so.5 and always wrote FLAG_ELF_LIBC6 to the cache instead. The older Linux libcs have been obsolete for more than twenty years. I do not know how much work this would be, so if someone can review your patch and it can go in, that's fine with me. Thanks, Florian