From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS3215 2.6.0.0/16 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.3 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from sourceware.org (server2.sourceware.org [IPv6:2620:52:3:1:0:246e:9693:128c]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 796581F8C6 for ; Tue, 3 Aug 2021 20:05:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: from server2.sourceware.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 190B8385502C for ; Tue, 3 Aug 2021 20:05:51 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 190B8385502C DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sourceware.org; s=default; t=1628021151; bh=4s/Nti6DULWH/I37l5Lm6WSmEvJqJtv63THqYCrT2aw=; h=Date:To:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:List-Id:List-Unsubscribe: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe:From:Reply-To:Cc: From; b=wge1+xOLL4fRFeKcj28s26ip+phgoyQxI2FABRfdokAfI9Q4hQca9Q/xM+pf0IDiU vCQ/whhAICBCxiYPYbYesx1nnMIqlRSHCYPAcUYZcHUGLQvJIUjVSQxQpa3sSIe2Pp PTGe+9KwQmMcKUogD/2PNCtAyXaOQPYyztTgM0DA= Received: from alln-iport-4.cisco.com (alln-iport-4.cisco.com [173.37.142.91]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CCFF9385AC36 for ; Tue, 3 Aug 2021 20:04:18 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org CCFF9385AC36 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.84,292,1620691200"; d="scan'208";a="724426297" Received: from alln-core-6.cisco.com ([173.36.13.139]) by alln-iport-4.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA; 03 Aug 2021 20:04:18 +0000 Received: from zorba ([10.24.30.193]) by alln-core-6.cisco.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id 173K4Fu3009170 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 3 Aug 2021 20:04:17 GMT Date: Tue, 3 Aug 2021 13:04:15 -0700 To: "H.J. Lu" Subject: Re: RFC: Add DT_GNU_DEBUG Message-ID: <20210803200415.GA1633923@zorba> References: <20210728154408.GF1633923@zorba> <20210728190211.GJ1633923@zorba> <87o8agto7v.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com> <20210803163917.GU1633923@zorba> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: X-Auto-Response-Suppress: DR, OOF, AutoReply X-Outbound-SMTP-Client: 10.24.30.193, [10.24.30.193] X-Outbound-Node: alln-core-6.cisco.com X-BeenThere: libc-alpha@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Libc-alpha mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , From: Daniel Walker via Libc-alpha Reply-To: Daniel Walker Cc: Florian Weimer , Carlos O'Donell via Libc-alpha , Pedro Alves , Conan C Huang , "Metzger, Markus T" , Jeremy Stenglein , "xe-linux-external\(mailer list\)" Errors-To: libc-alpha-bounces+e=80x24.org@sourceware.org Sender: "Libc-alpha" On Tue, Aug 03, 2021 at 11:08:35AM -0700, H.J. Lu wrote: > On Tue, Aug 3, 2021 at 9:39 AM Daniel Walker wrote: > > > > On Mon, Aug 02, 2021 at 06:10:55AM -0700, H.J. Lu wrote: > > > On Sun, Aug 1, 2021 at 10:22 PM Florian Weimer wrote: > > > > > > > > * H. J. Lu: > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Jul 28, 2021 at 1:04 PM H.J. Lu wrote: > > > > >> > Do you want to drive this, or should I ? It looks like you know the people > > > > >> > involved better than I do. > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> https://groups.google.com/g/generic-abi/c/1ngxmSwrafc > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > I don't think the gABI community is interested in a new debug dynamic > > > > > tag. I propose DT_GNU_DEBUG: > > > > > > > > > > #define DT_GNU_DEBUG 0x6ffffff8 > > > > > > > > > > for the address of a pointer which will be filled by the dynamic > > > > > linker. Linker should > > > > > add the DT_GNU_DEBUG entry to executable's dynamic section. > > > > > > > > > > BTW, we have a choice. DT_GNU_DEBUG can be readonly or readonly after > > > > > relocation, like DT_DEBUG. > > > > > > > > What about adding DT_DEBUG_SIZE, specifying the size of the data pointed > > > > to by DT_DEBUG? > > > > > > It works if we don't need to support static executables. > > Given that we export _r_debug and some programs, like GNAT, use it, > we should keep and fix _r_debug. We should also make the new interface > available for these programs and include the structure size in the new > interface. > > > > > > > > Perhaps the gABI folks are interested in that, too? I think it's worth > > > > a try. If the answer is “no”, we can still add DT_GNU_DEBUG_SIZE to the > > > > GNU ABI. > > > > > > I did. I didn't get any feedback. > > > > So no feedback equal "not interested" ? > > I'd like to resolve this issue for glibc 2.35. We need to move forward with > a new DT_XXX. We can't wait too long. What sort of response are you specifically looking for ? Daniel