From: Carlos O'Donell <carlos@redhat.com>
To: Florian Weimer <fweimer@redhat.com>,
Samuel Thibault <samuel.thibault@ens-lyon.org>,
libc-alpha@sourceware.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add RTLD_RELOAD to dlopen
Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2017 19:57:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <fa5875b9-d7bc-d31e-b80d-ac8396220fe1@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <214b39b1-782e-e638-e231-3d74b407a7ca@redhat.com>
On 08/03/2017 01:26 PM, Florian Weimer wrote:
> On 08/03/2017 04:37 PM, Samuel Thibault wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> So, is it OK to add this? Considering that dlmopen() brings us far from
>> enough factorization for our needs, and dlopen() currently never reloads
>> unless a real fat copy of the file is done (hardlinks/symlinks don't
>> work, as it is based on st_ino).
>
> I would still see a discussion of the intended symbol binding behavior.
>
> What happens if a subsequently loaded object references a duplicated
> library? Will it reference the most recent duplicate, or the original
> library?
>
> What happens if libA depends on libB, and you need to duplicate both?
>
> What happens with RTLD_NEXT in a duplicated object? Will it look at
> earlier duplicates, too?
>
> What happens if you reload libc.so? Your test case assumes that
> reloading works for libm.so, but I think even that is a bit of a stretch.
Agreed. If we add RTLD_RELOAD the semantics must be clearly documented.
We have enough problems with the existing interfaces that I would like
to see this documented better if you're adding a new constant.
On top of this you need tests for the various semantically different
claims we make to show they still work.
And it is *not* OK to go in as-is.
--
Cheers,
Carlos.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-08-03 19:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-07-20 19:15 Samuel Thibault
2017-07-20 19:31 ` Carlos O'Donell
2017-07-20 19:34 ` Samuel Thibault
2017-07-20 20:03 ` Carlos O'Donell
2017-07-20 20:19 ` Samuel Thibault
2017-07-20 20:26 ` Samuel Thibault
2017-07-20 20:31 ` Samuel Thibault
2017-07-23 10:17 ` Florian Weimer
2017-08-03 14:37 ` Samuel Thibault
2017-08-03 17:26 ` Florian Weimer
2017-08-03 19:57 ` Carlos O'Donell [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=fa5875b9-d7bc-d31e-b80d-ac8396220fe1@redhat.com \
--to=carlos@redhat.com \
--cc=fweimer@redhat.com \
--cc=libc-alpha@sourceware.org \
--cc=samuel.thibault@ens-lyon.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).