This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: [PATCH] Avoid PLT when calling __sched_getaffinity_new
- From: Joseph Myers <joseph at codesourcery dot com>
- To: "H.J. Lu" <hjl dot tools at gmail dot com>
- Cc: Florian Weimer <fweimer at redhat dot com>, GNU C Library <libc-alpha at sourceware dot org>
- Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2015 15:06:48 +0000
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] Avoid PLT when calling __sched_getaffinity_new
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <20150821170918 dot GA29943 at intel dot com> <561E4D6C dot 9040303 at redhat dot com> <CAMe9rOqT6cGee5iXWbqPfvZqYf=z53O-2LggQ-xGkMwQ+o1XAA at mail dot gmail dot com>
On Wed, 14 Oct 2015, H.J. Lu wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 5:41 AM, Florian Weimer <fweimer@redhat.com> wrote:
> > On 08/21/2015 07:09 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
> >> This patch adds an internal entry for __sched_getaffinity_new so that
> >> __sched_getaffinity_old calls __sched_getaffinity_new without going
> >> through PLT.
> >>
> >> OK for master?
> >
> > This phenomenon is not restricted to just this file. Why do you need to
> > change this instance in particular?
> >
>
> I opened BZ #18822 and I will remove unnecessary PLT one by one.
Will you also add a testcase for this issue? (You'll need to allow for
the relocation / relocations in question depending on the architecture,
with some architectures not having any difference in relocations depending
on whether functions are marked hidden and so not being able to run such a
relocation-based test - it might however be possible to test in a
different way not depending on names of relocations. As usual, if you
make a change that doesn't include the corresponding changes for all
architectures, <https://sourceware.org/glibc/wiki/PortStatus> needs
updating to list non-updated architectures and describe what should be
done for them.)
--
Joseph S. Myers
joseph@codesourcery.com