This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: [PATCH 2/2] Add a testcase for copy reloc against protected data
- From: Joseph Myers <joseph at codesourcery dot com>
- To: "H.J. Lu" <hjl dot tools at gmail dot com>
- Cc: GNU C Library <libc-alpha at sourceware dot org>
- Date: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 22:23:12 +0000
- Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] Add a testcase for copy reloc against protected data
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <20150306002424 dot GA17971 at intel dot com> <alpine dot DEB dot 2 dot 10 dot 1503061903280 dot 24477 at digraph dot polyomino dot org dot uk> <CAMe9rOpROBqX81gnjQuYn3dVBquSvPsMA9oWE5F+8csknWf66g at mail dot gmail dot com>
On Fri, 6 Mar 2015, H.J. Lu wrote:
> > Suppose I configure / build with new binutils but a GCC version without
> > your patches. What will the results be? That the tests don't build /
> > run? That they build / run but fail (best avoided if possible)? In
> > either case, you need clear documentation for architecture maintainers on
> > what GCC versions (*not* requiring any uncommitted GCC patches) must be
> > used to identify whether architecture-specific changes are needed and to
> > test such changes.
> I will submit a separate patch to address GCC issue.
I don't think these tests should go in glibc until:
(a) they work with some checked-in mainline GCC version (i.e., if they
need the GCC patches you posted, those are on GCC trunk);
(b) it's clear what GCC and binutils versions are needed for the tests to
work (e.g. "GCC 5 or later, trunk revision NNNNNN or later; binutils
commit 89abcdef or later").
Joseph S. Myers