From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 41485 invoked by alias); 12 Oct 2016 15:39:52 -0000 Mailing-List: contact libc-alpha-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: libc-alpha-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 41465 invoked by uid 89); 12 Oct 2016 15:39:51 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_RED autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy= X-HELO: relay1.mentorg.com Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2016 15:39:00 -0000 From: Joseph Myers To: Adhemerval Zanella CC: Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] Consolidate posix_fadvise implementations In-Reply-To: <086eefb0-907f-7dea-0af6-b3f4b15eddc7@linaro.org> Message-ID: References: <1475021701-22246-1-git-send-email-adhemerval.zanella@linaro.com> <1475021701-22246-3-git-send-email-adhemerval.zanella@linaro.com> <724b49ae-ab7a-d678-cac6-ba286bf8b069@gotplt.org> <086eefb0-907f-7dea-0af6-b3f4b15eddc7@linaro.org> User-Agent: Alpine 2.20 (DEB 67 2015-01-07) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" X-ClientProxiedBy: svr-ies-mbx-01.mgc.mentorg.com (139.181.222.1) To svr-ies-mbx-01.mgc.mentorg.com (139.181.222.1) X-SW-Source: 2016-10/txt/msg00221.txt.bz2 On Wed, 12 Oct 2016, Adhemerval Zanella wrote: > For some reason I am not seeing this issue with my mips64n64 toolchain > (gcc 5.3.1, binutils 2.26.0.20160331). I was using GCC 5.4.1 20160810 and binutils 2.27.51.20160810. I've now updated to today's GCC 5 branch and binutils master, and still see the same issue, in a clean build from scratch. The error is complaining about libc.so when linking sotruss-lib.so. libc.so has (readelf --dyn-syms) 262: 000000000010b950 28 FUNC GLOBAL DEFAULT 12 posix_fadvise64@GLIBC_2.2 417: 000000000010b950 28 FUNC WEAK DEFAULT 12 posix_fadvise64@@GLIBC_2.2 1505: 000000000010b950 28 FUNC GLOBAL DEFAULT 12 posix_fadvise64@@GLIBC_2.3.3 that is, two separate definitions at version GLIBC_2.2. It looks to me like sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/posix_fadvise64.c would create a posix_fadvise64 weak_alias, while sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/mips/mips64/n64/posix_fadvise64.c then adds compat_symbol / versioned_symbol calls. If a symbol is being created with explicit versioning, direct weak_alias / strong_alias calls for it should be disabled. -- Joseph S. Myers joseph@codesourcery.com