Bug 31757 - Should XXXf128_do_not_use functions be excluded?
Summary: Should XXXf128_do_not_use functions be excluded?
Status: RESOLVED FIXED
Alias: None
Product: glibc
Classification: Unclassified
Component: build (show other bugs)
Version: 2.40
: P2 normal
Target Milestone: 2.40
Assignee: Not yet assigned to anyone
URL:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2024-05-19 22:41 UTC by H.J. Lu
Modified: 2024-05-24 12:50 UTC (History)
1 user (show)

See Also:
Host:
Target:
Build:
Last reconfirmed:

Attachments
Add an attachment (proposed patch, testcase, etc.)

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description H.J. Lu 2024-05-19 22:41:08 UTC 
On x86-64, libc provides finitef128_do_not_use,
isinff128_do_not_use and isnanf128_do_not_use.  Should they be excluded?
Comment 1 H.J. Lu 2024-05-19 22:48:39 UTC 
There is also nexttowardf128_do_not_use in libm.a.
Comment 2 Sourceware Commits 2024-05-22 13:13:21 UTC 
The master branch has been updated by H.J. Lu <hjl@sourceware.org>:

https://sourceware.org/git/gitweb.cgi?p=glibc.git;h=43d41ae6d74441dd5d21045324ff7391e7b0f545

commit 43d41ae6d74441dd5d21045324ff7391e7b0f545
Author: H.J. Lu <hjl.tools@gmail.com>
Date:   Mon May 20 05:25:34 2024 -0700

    Don't provide XXXf128_do_not_use aliases [BZ #31757]
    
    Don't provide __nexttowardf128_do_not_use, nexttowardf128_do_not_use,
    finitef128_do_not_use, isinff128_do_not_use and isnanf128_do_not_use.
    This fixes BZ #31757.
    
    Signed-off-by: H.J. Lu <hjl.tools@gmail.com>
    Reviewed-by: Adhemerval Zanella  <adhemerval.zanella@linaro.org>
Comment 3 H.J. Lu 2024-05-24 12:50:41 UTC 
Fixed in 2.40.