On Fri, Jun 30, 2023 at 5:55 PM Paul E Murphy <murphyp@linux.ibm.com> wrote:

>
>
> On 6/30/23 9:58 AM, Siddhesh Poyarekar wrote:
> >
> >
> > On 2023-06-28 04:42, Frédéric Bérat wrote:
> >> The *_chk routines naming doesn't match the name that would be generated
> >> using libc_hidden_ldbl_proto. Since the macro is needed for some of
> >> these *_chk functions for _FORTIFY_SOURCE to be enabled, that needed to
> >> be fixed.
> >> While at it, all the *_chk function get renamed appropriately for
> >> consistency, even if not strictly necessary.
> >> ---
> >
> > LGTM, but I'd like Raji to pitch in as well as ppc maintainer.
>
>
> This LGTM (on behalf of Raji).  I am surprised this wasn't noticed
> sooner.  Was it not noticed because there are no internal calls within
> libc to these functions?
>
>
It wasn't noticed because the macros were not used nor needed as long as
building glibc with fortification was forbidden by the configure script.


> Reviewed-by: Paul E. Murphy <murphyp@linux.ibm.com>
>
>
>