This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: rename consolidation question
- From: Adhemerval Zanella <adhemerval dot zanella at linaro dot org>
- To: "Ellcey, Steve" <Steve dot Ellcey at cavium dot com>, "Norov, Yuri" <Yuri dot Norov at caviumnetworks dot com>
- Cc: "Pinski, Andrew" <Andrew dot Pinski at cavium dot com>, GNU C Library <libc-alpha at sourceware dot org>
- Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2016 16:53:49 -0200
- Subject: Re: rename consolidation question
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <SN2PR0701MB10718E2E3CEC567403A6B535F59B0@SN2PR0701MB1071.namprd07.prod.outlook.com>
On 13/12/2016 16:22, Ellcey, Steve wrote:
> Yury and Adhemerval,
>
> I was wondering about the status of the rename consolidation patch
> is. I found this string:
>
> https://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/2016-10/msg00247.html
>
> But I am not sure what the resolution is and what patch we want.
> I have been doing the wrong thing in my builds so far by defining
> __ARCH_WANT_RENAMEAT in the ILP32 aarch64 build but I should not
> be doing that. If I remove that define then the build fails when
> compiling rename.c. I see that yury's branch removes
> sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/generic/rename.c and adds
> sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/rename.c and sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/renameat.c.
> It also removed renameat from sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/syscalls.list.
>
> Is that the patch we need to send to libc-alpha?
>
> Steve Ellcey
I think it would require two simple patches:
- one to consolidate rename to use either __SYS_rename, __SYS_renameat,
or __SYS_renameat2;
- and another one to consolidate renameat to user either __SYS_rename
or __SYS_renameat2.
I added a scratch branch for both in my local repo [1]. I will sent
them upstream and try to get them for next release.
[1] https://github.com/zatrazz/glibc/tree/master-rename