[PATCHv4][PING][BZ #17833] _dl_close_worker() does not release inconsistent objects.

[H.J. Lu]

On Wed, May 27, 2015 at 5:17 AM, Pavel Kopyl <p.kopyl@samsung.com> wrote:
>
>
> On 05/13/2015 02:40 PM, Pavel Kopyl wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On 04/24/2015 02:47 PM, H.J. Lu wrote:
>>>
>>> On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 3:33 AM, Pavel Kopyl <p.kopyl@samsung.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 03/03/2015 12:13 PM, Pavel Kopyl wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 03/01/2015 10:17 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 27 Feb 2015 16:32, Pavel Kopyl wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --- /dev/null
>>>>>>> +++ b/elf/tst-unique5lib.cc
>>>>>>> @@ -0,0 +1,13 @@
>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>
>>>>>> i know existing tests are bad examples, but lets try and start fixing
>>>>>> that.
>>>>>> namely, there should be a header here giving a quick overview of what
>>>>>> it
>>>>>> is
>>>>>> exactly you're testing for, and a BZ reference.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> +extern int not_exist ();
>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>> +inline int make_unique ()
>>>>>>> +{
>>>>>>> +  static int unique;
>>>>>>> +  return ++unique;
>>>>>>> +}
>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>> +int foo ()
>>>>>>> +{
>>>>>>> +  return make_unique () + not_exist ();
>>>>>>> +}
>>>>>>
>>>>>> i don't know if this is just copy & pasting, but prototypes that do
>>>>>> not
>>>>>> intend
>>>>>> to take args should always be (void).
>>>>>> -mike
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks for review, I fixed that in patch v3.
>>>>
>>>> Ping.
>>>>
>>> Some comments:
>>>
>>> 1. The bug report is against STB_GNU_UNIQUE.  But I don't see
>>> STB_GNU_UNIQUE in
>>> testcase.  I can't tell if the original STB_GNU_UNIQUE bug is fixed.
>>> 2. Your testcase ignores dlopen error.  Why should it work at all?
>>> 3. Your testcase doesn't use test-skeleton.c.
>>>
>>
>> Thanks for review!
>>
>> 1. I added some comments in testcase to be more clear.
>>
>> 2. Actually the call below is expected to return NULL because of undefined
>> symbol in the library.
>>
>> dlopen ("$ORIGIN/tst-unique5lib.so", RTLD_NOW);
>>
>> It's a goal of this testcase: I need some library with STB_GNU_UNIQUE
>> symbols that returns error when trying to load it.
>> In new patch version I especially point out to this fact by checking
>> return value.
>>
>> 3. It seems for me that template of the test-skeleton.c is not appropriate
>> because this testcase has two related binary - library and executable.
>>
>>
>> -Pavel
>
> Ping.
>

Since you changed DF_1_NODELETE, how did you test it?  Does your test
fail without the DF_1_NODELETE change?

-- 
H.J.