[PATCH v3] Fix dynamic linker issue with bind-now

[Petar Jovanovic]

Mike, what do you suggest?

Regards,
Petar

-----Original Message-----
From: Petar Jovanovic [mailto:petar.jovanovic@rt-rk.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, March 4, 2015 2:11 AM
To: 'Mike Frysinger'
Cc: 'libc-alpha@sourceware.org'
Subject: RE: [PATCH v3] Fix dynamic linker issue with bind-now

> that seems kind of dicey.  i think doing it explicitly like you were before is less risky ?

I would agree.

> i thought we used linker scripts in glibc tests more, but i'm not actually finding any.  i'm not sure if we're trying to avoid them.
> there's no way to produce a test that doesn't use linker scripts but still triggers the problem you're fixing ?

The problem itself will appear wihout linkers scripts too, but I do not know if we can have a small test with no use of linker scripts.

We could also omit a test if none can fit the existing test suite?

Regards,
Petar

-----Original Message-----
From: Mike Frysinger [mailto:vapier@gentoo.org] 
Sent: Tuesday, March 3, 2015 10:48 PM
To: Petar Jovanovic
Cc: libc-alpha@sourceware.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] Fix dynamic linker issue with bind-now

On 03 Mar 2015 19:54, Petar Jovanovic wrote:
> For x86-32, it will break. So, as it appears, the test is not portable.
> I can simplify it in the following way:
> 
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/elf/tst-split-dynreloc.lds
> @@ -0,0 +1,10 @@
> +SECTIONS
> +{
> +  .rela.dyn : { *(.rela.dyn) }
> +  .rel.dyn : { *(.rel.dyn) }
> +  . += 1000;
> +  .rela.plt : { *(.rela.plt) }
> +  .rel.plt : { *(.rel.plt) }
> +}
> +INSERT BEFORE .init;
> 
> This would also remove the need for __((section(".bar"))) in the test.
> What do you think?

that seems kind of dicey.  i think doing it explicitly like you were before is less risky ?

i thought we used linker scripts in glibc tests more, but i'm not actually finding any.  i'm not sure if we're trying to avoid them.

there's no way to produce a test that doesn't use linker scripts but still triggers the problem you're fixing ?
-mike