This is the mail archive of the
cygwin-developers
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Re: 64bit: C++ templates
- From: Corinna Vinschen <corinna-cygwin at cygwin dot com>
- To: cygwin-developers at cygwin dot com
- Date: Mon, 20 May 2013 11:26:14 +0200
- Subject: Re: 64bit: C++ templates
- References: <516CDE32 dot 5000206 at users dot sourceforge dot net> <516F5F89 dot 40600 at users dot sourceforge dot net> <518C9018 dot 9030606 at users dot sourceforge dot net> <CAEwic4aPQHUChVWui6h0FctFkHXh3A0zwh1On50cJRE=SV1UeA at mail dot gmail dot com> <CAEwic4ZAy++TifyZR=XZnD_xahM0GOdO-XREvY6ZdKGQRc+ykA at mail dot gmail dot com> <20130516082534 dot GB11933 at calimero dot vinschen dot de> <5199C9DB dot 8040406 at users dot sourceforge dot net>
- Reply-to: cygwin-developers at cygwin dot com
Hi Yaakov,
On May 20 01:59, Yaakov (Cygwin/X) wrote:
> On 2013-05-16 03:25, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> >Yesterday it turned out that the visibility stuff is not the real
> >problem. Mingw gcc 4.8 also produces the same set of symbols, but it
> >doesn't fail when linking.
>
> Is that surprising, given that PE-COFF medium/large code models were
> only added to trunk (AFAIK) post-4.8?
well, this is not exactly related to the medium/large code model
introduction but rather a feature of gcc 4.8. The same problematic
symbols are generated in the small code model in 4.8, but not with gcc
4.7.2.
> >Some more testing now showed clearly that this problem is related to the
> >high address used as base addresses in the Cygwin toolchain. If you
> >build the harfbuzz DLL not with
> >
> > -Wl,--enable-auto-image-base
> >
> >but instead with a fixed address in the lower 31 bit address area,
> >for instance
> >
> > -Wl,--image-base -Wl,0x7ff00000
> >
> >the problem disappears and you can successfully build the DLL.
>
> This seems to fix harfbuzz wrt gtk2; gtk3 still isn't working, but
> I'm not sure it's related yet.
Dunno, but more info on that might help my collegues to fix the issue.
> >Alternatively, you can also workaround this issue by building harfbuzz
> >with the -mcmodel=large option, which doesn't suffer this problem due to
> >the way symbols are only indirectly addressed.
>
> With this, the link succeeded but I got SEGVs in one of the same
> symbols that failed to link previously.
This is a weird one! Maybe there's still some bug in the large model
code generation?!? OTOH, if that's only related to this kind of symbol
it might be a related issue. Can you check if setting
-fvisibility-inlines-hidden or -fno-visibility-inlines-hidden changes
the outcome?
> >Right now it seems this is a bfd bug in the relocation code. The code
> >tests these 32 bit pc-relative offsets by checking if the result still
> >fits into 31 bit, without taking the high image base into account.
> >Also, for some reason this doesn't occur with all symbols, but only with
> >a very specific set of symbols (weak and a special kind of section
> >symbols).
> >
> >That's it for now. We're still looking into providing a solution.
>
> Please keep me posted.
Sure!
Thanks,
Corinna
--
Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Maintainer cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Red Hat