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 [216.205.24.124]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5C5E93851C2A for ; Tue, 22 Sep 2020 17:37:22 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 sourceware.org 5C5E93851C2A 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-287-PJKM10Z6NtuwyvDGo6r5Hg-1; Tue, 22 Sep 2020 13:37:19 -0400 X-MC-Unique: PJKM10Z6NtuwyvDGo6r5Hg-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.11]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8A259802B70; Tue, 22 Sep 2020 17:37:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: from oldenburg2.str.redhat.com (ovpn-114-108.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.114.108]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 39DDF7881A; Tue, 22 Sep 2020 17:37:14 +0000 (UTC) From: Florian Weimer To: Carlos O'Donell Cc: Carlos O'Donell via Libc-alpha , "Daniel Walker (danielwa)" , Pedro Alves , "Jeremy Stenglein (jstengle)" , "xe-linux-external(mailer list)" Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/3] implement dlmopen hooks for gdb References: <20200626193228.1953-1-danielwa@cisco.com> <0f791d3a-20bc-4524-54eb-ce6df108fbff@redhat.com> <20200723184054.GD9875@zorba> <3ff42e45-b394-bf50-38c4-93baecc71497@redhat.com> <87h7rpwxke.fsf@oldenburg2.str.redhat.com> Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2020 19:37:12 +0200 In-Reply-To: (Carlos O'Donell's message of "Tue, 22 Sep 2020 13:28:46 -0400") Message-ID: <87y2l1vhkn.fsf@oldenburg2.str.redhat.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.11 X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, DKIM_VALID_EF, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS, TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) 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: Tue, 22 Sep 2020 17:37:23 -0000 * Carlos O'Donell: > On 9/22/20 1:06 PM, Florian Weimer wrote: >> * Carlos O'Donell via Libc-alpha: >> >>> Your next step would be to export the symbol via Versions at the current >>> symbol node GLIBC_2.32 (soon to be GLIBC_2.33). >> >> Can we create a new GLIBC_DEBUG symbol versions for symbols which are >> not intended to be used for run-time linking? >> >> The idea is that consumers will have deal with the absence of these >> symbols anyway, so we just need one symbol version that does not depend >> on the glibc version for this. Dependency management considerations >> (that apply to symbols with run-time linking) do not come into play here. > > I don't object to GLIBC_DEBUG, like GLIBC_PRIVATE it can be considered > a transient ABI that is valid only for a major release? No, unlike GLIBC_PRIVATE, you can assume that if a GLIBC_DEBUG symbol is there (and perhaps has the documented size), it has the documented semantics. But you can't assume that it is present. The semantics of GLIBC_PRIVATE symbols can change arbitrarily, even between builds. Thanks, Florian -- Red Hat GmbH, https://de.redhat.com/ , Registered seat: Grasbrunn, Commercial register: Amtsgericht Muenchen, HRB 153243, Managing Directors: Charles Cachera, Brian Klemm, Laurie Krebs, Michael O'Neill