This is the mail archive of the
glibc-bugs@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
[Bug build/13844] `nptl/sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/sparc/sparc32/libc-lowlevellock.c' missing in glibc sources
- From: "carlos_odonell at mentor dot com" <sourceware-bugzilla at sourceware dot org>
- To: glibc-bugs at sources dot redhat dot com
- Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2012 15:14:53 +0000
- Subject: [Bug build/13844] `nptl/sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/sparc/sparc32/libc-lowlevellock.c' missing in glibc sources
- Auto-submitted: auto-generated
- References: <bug-13844-131@http.sourceware.org/bugzilla/>
http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=13844
Carlos O'Donell <carlos_odonell at mentor dot com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |carlos_odonell at mentor
| |dot com
Flags| |review?(davem at davemloft
| |dot net)
--- Comment #3 from Carlos O'Donell <carlos_odonell at mentor dot com> 2012-03-15 15:14:53 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> (In reply to comment #1)
> . . .
> > (3) . . . The normal sysdep
> > override mechanism should have selected the sparc32 version of lowlevellock.c
> > *unless* your configure options failed to cause the selection of sparc32. . .
> . . .
> And it actually did when compiling lowlevellock.o{,s}, however `#include
> "lowlevellock.c"' in the generic version of libc-lowlevellock.c causes the
> generic version of lowlevellock.c to be included (because they are in the same
> directory) rather than the sparc32 one.
>
> If you still need a full configure log, I'll provide it a bit later.
No, that makes more sense to me.
I see HPPA has it's own version of libc-lowlevellock.c probably because of this
issue.
I also think ARM might suffer the same problem, it has a lowlevellock.c but no
overriding libc-lowlevellock.c like HPPA.
OK, confirmed, on ARM we are also using the *default* lowlevellock.c e.g.
~~~
nptl/libc-lowlevellock.os: file format elf32-littlearm
Disassembly of section .text:
00000000 <__lll_lock_wait_private>:
__lll_lock_wait_private():
/opt/codesourcery/arm-verifone-linux-gnueabi/src/glibc/nptl/../nptl/sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/lowlevellock.c:29
0: e92d40f0 push {r4, r5, r6, r7, lr}
~~~
OK, some big-picture questions.
Dave, Why does sparc have a custom version of lowlevellock.c? Why do any
architectures? The custom versions all seem vaguely similar to the generic
linux version.
If architectures *do* need to override the generic lowlevellock.c without
overriding libc-lowlevellock.c then I think the right solution would be to make
libc-lowlevellock.c use `#include <lowlevellock.c>` such that the sysdep
include mechanism includes the right file.
Il'ya, Would you mind testing that change?
--
Configure bugmail: http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.