[PATCH] x86: Support GNU_PROPERTY_X86_ISA_1_V[234] marker [BZ #26717]

[Florian Weimer]

* H. J. Lu:

>> It's not clear based on this description if the expectation is that the
>> search for alternative implementations continues after an attempt to
>> load an object fails due to an architecture level mismatch.
>>
>
> 1. ldconfig should issue an error for shared objects with mismatched ISA
> level and mark such shared objects in ld.so cache.

But what is the algorithm for that?

> 2. ld.so should skip shared objects with incompatible ISA level similar to
> EM_386 shared objects.   If ld.so detects it after loading such a shared
> object, ld.so should issue a hard error.

These two sentences seem to contradict each other.  Do you mean that
with a relative path/soname, ld.so should continue searching?  But if it
is not searching at all because ld.so was passed an absolute path, it
should produce an error?

Thanks,
Florian
-- 
Red Hat GmbH, https://de.redhat.com/ , Registered seat: Grasbrunn,
Commercial register: Amtsgericht Muenchen, HRB 153243,
Managing Directors: Charles Cachera, Brian Klemm, Laurie Krebs, Michael O'Neill