From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-pf1-x432.google.com (mail-pf1-x432.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::432]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 09DE63858431 for ; Tue, 16 Nov 2021 05:29:15 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org 09DE63858431 Received: by mail-pf1-x432.google.com with SMTP id g18so17063364pfk.5 for ; Mon, 15 Nov 2021 21:29:14 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=iNf/OU9MXlYYf1fVfHRmZoBdV0Cl0sNdPVCI1C6bZ8o=; b=Zv2Mtyiz7LdCb1ugAa+LZLgbRzZjxkTcp+lVtjVWT2Y8XDd1H80koSRARLGAo4H6Hj yuk2fDRb2+DBshRUsAB5vlX28+ryJdlzaGo996peEZYofDuUUnK43Vq7FkynAHO/P3tQ Eory4FcTyyQ++PVsnY0AhjrghhbmNx/e4SilhsbXi7/BsXFmk2Xl4hR83xZORYjZouKp WD//ELtUva4C+1J9rqlqkGFcvI23xCR+0LTbOHk1+MpTQifRZQS2CE+aK0YWXLE8rzpL qEHl6hed/tN7XXrk8WPVPCQBKI4oLul0hKRYXXGSu5d9nLaEtVNgkP8ZjJFrb3KAtqN5 f3bA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533piFiynHlYVwvPLZpMgZP/BSlNqBn2zqfXmZLjGW643BVId3jw Mo0R2g7HOgDsQHeDNgAIctw= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxBzCmzcSGeveX7qGsTYb7hojqtsA6/anvGLF9bxjDCjgrM9m6Om8XA6BsYfKvFvxBp+mDhtA== X-Received: by 2002:a62:1b51:0:b0:49f:a8d8:84b with SMTP id b78-20020a621b51000000b0049fa8d8084bmr37824593pfb.31.1637040551590; Mon, 15 Nov 2021 21:29:11 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost ([2409:10:24a0:4700:e8ad:216a:2a9d:6d0c]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id g20sm9036761pfj.12.2021.11.15.21.29.10 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Mon, 15 Nov 2021 21:29:11 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2021 14:29:09 +0900 From: Stafford Horne To: Siddhesh Poyarekar Cc: GLIBC patches Subject: Re: [PATCH] malloc: Fix malloc debug for 2.35 onwards Message-ID: References: <20211113004047.1980486-1-shorne@gmail.com> <98e3b40a-3d1f-bac9-997b-22a659a1200b@gotplt.org> <629dbe12-64c5-4307-183f-2c679a2cdd8c@gotplt.org> <6fa81c60-d8a2-71ba-e964-c7e4161b9322@gotplt.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <6fa81c60-d8a2-71ba-e964-c7e4161b9322@gotplt.org> X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, DKIM_VALID_EF, FREEMAIL_FROM, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS, TXREP, URIBL_BLACK autolearn=no 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: Tue, 16 Nov 2021 05:29:22 -0000 On Tue, Nov 16, 2021 at 10:45:17AM +0530, Siddhesh Poyarekar wrote: > On 11/16/21 10:42, Stafford Horne wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 16, 2021 at 04:17:10AM +0530, Siddhesh Poyarekar wrote: > > > On 11/16/21 02:37, Stafford Horne wrote: > > > > I am not sure, after my patch the SHLIB_COMPAT usage is just there for compat > > > > symbols. As you mention using SHLIB_COMPAT to ensure libc_malloc_debug.so and > > > > libc.so have the same version seems strange, I would think that would be > > > > controlled by shlib-version or done out of the box. > > > > > > Right, so it mostly works, i.e. you have symbols with version names: > > > > > > ... > > > > 00009bb4 g DF .text 00000030 GLIBC_2.35 memalign > > > > 0000a5a8 g DF .text 00000138 GLIBC_2.35 mallinfo > > > > 000091a0 g DF .text 00000180 GLIBC_2.35 malloc > > > > 0000a2ac g DF .text 000000f8 GLIBC_2.35 mallopt > > > ... > > > > > > but they're default versions, which is not desirable since we don't want > > > this library to be linkable. So you will need a new macro that always > > > creates the non-default symbol at the version that it was introduced. > > > > I think I get what you mean. Is this something you are planning to sort out? > > As is without this patch the mem tests are failing on my port, and any future > > ports. For existing ports it is working because of the HACK as you say. > > I was hoping you'd do that ;) If you're unable to, I'll try to get to it > later in the week. Sure :), Let me have a look at it. Thanks, -Stafford