From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <libc-alpha-return-93824-listarch-libc-alpha=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 50922 invoked by alias); 29 Jun 2018 14:04:52 -0000
Mailing-List: contact libc-alpha-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <libc-alpha.sourceware.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:libc-alpha-subscribe@sourceware.org>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/>
List-Post: <mailto:libc-alpha@sourceware.org>
List-Help: <mailto:libc-alpha-help@sourceware.org>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: libc-alpha-owner@sourceware.org
Received: (qmail 48553 invoked by uid 89); 29 Jun 2018 14:04:51 -0000
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none
X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=
X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/9] Add __vfscanf_internal and __vfwscanf_internal with
 flags arguments.
To: Adhemerval Zanella <adhemerval.zanella@linaro.org>,
 libc-alpha@sourceware.org
References: <20180307193205.4751-1-zackw@panix.com>
 <20180307193205.4751-3-zackw@panix.com>
 <d27f8afa-7d00-96ee-8f98-35f9fe127e0e@linaro.org>
From: Florian Weimer <fweimer@redhat.com>
Message-ID: <8b874526-21c8-a825-ee5d-7de604be9dfa@redhat.com>
Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2018 14:04:00 -0000
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/52.8.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <d27f8afa-7d00-96ee-8f98-35f9fe127e0e@linaro.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-SW-Source: 2018-06/txt/msg00978.txt.bz2

On 03/13/2018 01:35 PM, Adhemerval Zanella wrote:
>> @@ -1026,7 +1030,9 @@ compat_symbol (libc, __nldbl_vdprintf, vdprintf, GLIBC_2_0);
>>   compat_symbol (libc, __nldbl_vsnprintf, vsnprintf, GLIBC_2_0);
>>   compat_symbol (libc, __nldbl_vsprintf, vsprintf, GLIBC_2_0);
>>   compat_symbol (libc, __nldbl__IO_sscanf, _IO_sscanf, GLIBC_2_0);
>> +#if SHLIB_COMPAT (libc, GLIBC_2_0, GLIBC_2_28)
>>   compat_symbol (libc, __nldbl__IO_vfscanf, _IO_vfscanf, GLIBC_2_0);
>> +#endif
>>   compat_symbol (libc, __nldbl___vfscanf, __vfscanf, GLIBC_2_0);
>>   compat_symbol (libc, __nldbl___vsscanf, __vsscanf, GLIBC_2_0);
>>   compat_symbol (libc, __nldbl_fscanf, fscanf, GLIBC_2_0);

> I am not sure that nesting SHLIB_COMPAT is correct way logically and stylisc here:
> the compat symbol will be create only for ABI which initial version of GLIBC_2_0
> (which might not be an issue with current ABIs that requires ldbl to dbl compat
> symbol).

Wouldn't GLIBC_2_0 be expanded to the relevant default ABI baseline for 
the port and do the right thing here?

Thanks,
Florian