From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <libc-alpha-return-83661-listarch-libc-alpha=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 87698 invoked by alias); 22 Aug 2017 17:58:52 -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 87069 invoked by uid 89); 22 Aug 2017 17:58:52 -0000
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none
X-Virus-Found: No
X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM,SPF_PASS,URIBL_RED autolearn=no version=3.3.2 spammy=(unknown)
X-HELO: mail-oi0-f65.google.com
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=1e100.net; s=20161025;
        h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date
         :message-id:subject:to:cc;
        bh=xcKZReV9Fa5Qf2s9ncwYKG4hcgXSyQwtbfld4se/CSI=;
        b=HtOJjMpjBbM6bWG0cCI03mEf7RwvEun/qbE1fXimshYvIV+391xZ1h8edh8FWLzUrF
         3+9qc7Wrtct1P6Qq/2Nwxr5ZILvOClxrzsJRsv4iqPfGYk/Mj4e+iV22JKfSsNuvMTdQ
         UzaTVIO18sdAHskSuSvZXu1o8tinDUbb5qy9dFbUhZfkopisP+/WGwmlOyZH4tcQ3sNJ
         WepLG6FW+szLgzqIJp/5oo8I4XGy6U6YCu5EQG7y9jgtaGh0XxjnKJh1YHj5ya/kX4X+
         q4UflZc0P9UBm05fFONCcw/YauC3Tnrv+5x3Kj5atTZfTxxgaQqExbKaKmMcE6CrmeZk
         OoOw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AHYfb5jFhwbQciOjzQyCuW0354c2nJ0lE+Zkf0ym0Q2BKsMToocIwOVL
	OTvkG4YIysRWIjZd65dlMnOSH1gaaA==
X-Received: by 10.202.72.73 with SMTP id v70mr1756360oia.97.1503424729233;
 Tue, 22 Aug 2017 10:58:49 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAMe9rOr39bsXStfuXoP9F8aaPyq5gSdu3WmJUQ+2gjA_AEKYpQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20170817122549.GA15116@gmail.com> <6be4ed47-4eae-3bb9-73bf-0943067494f9@redhat.com>
 <CAMe9rOqMoQG+r6n5TfLDVFoAEAgiwhVUXx5XhaqOGhjUt-us8g@mail.gmail.com>
 <alpine.DEB.2.20.1708171359220.20976@digraph.polyomino.org.uk> <CAMe9rOr39bsXStfuXoP9F8aaPyq5gSdu3WmJUQ+2gjA_AEKYpQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: "H.J. Lu" <hjl.tools@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2017 17:58:00 -0000
Message-ID: <CAMe9rOrM0mptQkX28JhRkEAmCtz2B7fHHvbbBZNfwXmsfc3rsw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Mark internal functions with attribute_hidden
To: Joseph Myers <joseph@codesourcery.com>
Cc: Florian Weimer <fweimer@redhat.com>, GNU C Library <libc-alpha@sourceware.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
X-SW-Source: 2017-08/txt/msg01077.txt.bz2

On Thu, Aug 17, 2017 at 11:57 AM, H.J. Lu <hjl.tools@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 17, 2017 at 7:01 AM, Joseph Myers <joseph@codesourcery.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, 17 Aug 2017, H.J. Lu wrote:
>>
>>> Yes, this is target independent.   It should benefit static PIE build for all
>>> targets.  On x86, it bypasses GOT/PLT.
>>
>> Specifically, on x86 I'd consider this (making functions hidden if they
>> are not exported from the shared library containing their definitions) to
>> be part of the fix for bug 18822.
>>
>
> You are right.  Here is the same patch with libc.so size comparison on
> i686 and x86-64.
>
> OK for trunk?
>
>

Any comments or objections?


-- 
H.J.