This is the mail archive of the mailing list for the glibc project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: [PATCH 2/2] Add a testcase for copy reloc against protected data

On Fri, Mar 6, 2015 at 2:23 PM, Joseph Myers <> wrote:
> 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:

Which tests were you talking about?  My copy relocation
tests work with any GCC versions, with and without the fix

It also work with binutils master and released versions of
binutils.  Only binutils 2.25 branch is broken, which I will
fix shortly.  My patch includes a check for broken linker
and it skips those tests if linker is broken.

> (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


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]