public inbox for libc-ports@sourceware.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Andrew Pinski <pinskia@gmail.com>
To: Steve McIntyre <steve.mcintyre@linaro.org>
Cc: "libc-ports@sourceware.org" <libc-ports@sourceware.org>,
		Marcus Shawcroft <marcus.shawcroft@gmail.com>,
	"Carlos O'Donell" <carlos@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] [AArch64] Define BE loader name.
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2014 23:04:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CA+=Sn1mAkeCU+zt5jOQu5QZhqvuWX4yAvgHe8V6Wq9bpaxD8Tw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140113181623.GW8293@linaro.org>

On Mon, Jan 13, 2014 at 10:16 AM, Steve McIntyre
<steve.mcintyre@linaro.org> wrote:
> [ I hope this threads OK - replying to the thread using the list
>   archives... ]
>
> Carlos wrote:
>>
>>We need technical arguments from both sides to reach consensus.
>>
>>Marcus has to come up with real reasons for needing the new dynamic
>>linker name.
>
> Carlos already contributed to a ML discussion that happened after
> Linaro Connect in November last year, where we had broad consensus
> from the distros about separating the dynamic linker names for BE and
> LE systems:
>
>   http://lists.linaro.org/pipermail/cross-distro/2013-November/000570.html
>
> As a background to that, I'm the team lead for Big Endian work in the
> Linaro Networking Group (LNG). For a variety of reasons we're working
> on supporting both BE and LE code on a single system and we're
> investigating various options. Yes, it's a *horrible* idea but there
> are people who really want to use this. I can envisage places where we
> may want to have have both BE and LE binaries co-existing in the same
> system, and it would be nice if that's not locked out here.
>
> I'll be honest: I *don't* think that the general purpose Linux distros
> are likely to care about BE ARM or AArch64 systems in the same way as
> us, but who knows what might come up?
>
>>Andrew, you need to come up with concrete reasons for not wanting to
>>use a symlink or a copy.
>>
>>This is *exactly* the same kind of change we made for the 32-bit ARM
>>hard-float dynamic linker name change.
>
> Yup, Been there, done that. In future, would it not make sense in
> general to try and keep dynamic linkers separated by default?
>
>>The only wrinkle is that a symlink doesn't actually work:
>>https://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/2012-10/msg00670.html
>>
>>If Markus is suggesting using a symlink he'll have to look into the
>>problem I posted, because the last time I checked the symlink setup
>>didn't work and required a hack to be used until all binaries had
>>been migrated.
>
> Yup. :-( I remember the hack I came up with, and I've pointed Marcus
> at it to help him understand what we did and why:
>
>   http://anonscm.debian.org/viewvc/pkg-glibc/glibc-package/trunk/debian/patches/arm/local-soname-hack.diff?view=markup
>
>>Thankfully in the case of the hard-float dynamic linker name change
>>we had consensus that the name change was needed to support a mixed
>>environment.


I withdraw my objection to the patch.  Though I do feel this
discussion should have been done on the GCC/glibc list in addition to
the linaro cross distro list as not every one knows about that list.

Thanks,
Andrew Pinski

>
> Right.
>
> Cheers,
> --
> Steve McIntyre                                steve.mcintyre@linaro.org
> <http://www.linaro.org/> Linaro.org | Open source software for ARM SoCs
>

  reply	other threads:[~2014-01-17 23:04 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-01-01 17:38 Marcus Shawcroft
2014-01-01 19:31 ` pinskia
2014-01-01 19:57   ` pinskia
2014-01-06 11:06   ` Marcus Shawcroft
2014-01-06 17:16     ` Andrew Pinski
2014-01-08 22:43       ` Carlos O'Donell
2014-01-13 18:17         ` Steve McIntyre
2014-01-17 23:04           ` Andrew Pinski [this message]
2014-01-20 15:53             ` Marcus Shawcroft
2014-01-20 16:13               ` Joseph S. Myers
2014-01-20 16:15             ` Policy: Require new dynamic loader names for entirely new ABIs? Carlos O'Donell
2014-01-20 17:10               ` Steve McIntyre

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='CA+=Sn1mAkeCU+zt5jOQu5QZhqvuWX4yAvgHe8V6Wq9bpaxD8Tw@mail.gmail.com' \
    --to=pinskia@gmail.com \
    --cc=carlos@redhat.com \
    --cc=libc-ports@sourceware.org \
    --cc=marcus.shawcroft@gmail.com \
    --cc=steve.mcintyre@linaro.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).