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-Status: No, score=-4.1 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from sourceware.org (server2.sourceware.org [8.43.85.97]) (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 ECABF1F4B4 for ; Wed, 20 Jan 2021 12:50:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: from server2.sourceware.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 079AD3952DA7; Wed, 20 Jan 2021 12:50:19 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 079AD3952DA7 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sourceware.org; s=default; t=1611147019; bh=JfynX73EloanCNlb99TAWYuThWkcEwTAId19bpIr81A=; h=References:In-Reply-To:Date:Subject:To:List-Id:List-Unsubscribe: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe:From:Reply-To:Cc: From; b=w8Yq+XV3sO0QdNXTeSOCMf0kFzB+ireHqAezhthOzM4D4BdH2phGQi8W0Lr86pAn6 3yDFSgJ3ZoxjY7NSGhdfjiMa4L/Nh+scg1R8kDVfMhDUvS7PoQiKx9e4B7rEdi3ds2 VVmoCJxANxczbSXK2RjjQdtXsmVdVTQZ/qzPwwzo= Received: from mail-oi1-x236.google.com (mail-oi1-x236.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::236]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DA4373857814 for ; Wed, 20 Jan 2021 12:50:16 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 sourceware.org DA4373857814 Received: by mail-oi1-x236.google.com with SMTP id x71so9071021oia.9 for ; Wed, 20 Jan 2021 04:50:16 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=JfynX73EloanCNlb99TAWYuThWkcEwTAId19bpIr81A=; b=h6rjuJHDM/DmO6mFVdMArkR25w2fgYv+slRDVCUb1b4k/08c0IbPCl1tShgK5GwwMA HfsW6e6W0J3tfs2HfACeQP8tnpFT31h7LOZDgVdNikVt/oeNlHkFCW3jsePzwb9qBeaY 7RJqe0Zpbct8cCgNKucVUv7bVEV1w0I/T3IwEZdk08H2amv3QxsPp29+G7pFoGIRklWo 9wL4Bx/DYbRvtxOhaUVQItPSH/eaw3gAOaeN/6dae9XKOlfW9Ib64NnaR/yTRC2ZqIIx fWM76RHK4fDKjjkDyEf8Jv2IXPQ5nrvwQKVpI3OZKM/qgWiHp1Yf4COmDGPNuNrTxxmt KJLg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531zgveo1Bsa9zkmLtZSXp8QdtTD2rhLztOWs1yTB5m6ovdk8Agd ocB82XLfWBZ0SwIdDuyXVsoylS9i0kk7Sj+0mpo= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzErXBRMT8xsWG69/MXbBWeT6OdS2mmfOO9l/fZOeqPNNGudsAS3JguuhmvjtAMHEG5uIaFP5No4KTybFHi01k= X-Received: by 2002:aca:34c2:: with SMTP id b185mr2744596oia.25.1611147016328; Wed, 20 Jan 2021 04:50:16 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <9f68b24a-437c-db8e-d1fa-b26d2e06d103@linaro.org> <20210119182504.GG3445@arm.com> <831d6134-b688-9049-5d7c-4092f4a6d968@linaro.org> <71a094be-cce0-0082-7b1c-ec8566eaef3c@linaro.org> <20210120123830.GH3445@arm.com> In-Reply-To: <20210120123830.GH3445@arm.com> Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2021 04:49:40 -0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 00/10] fix ifunc with static pie [BZ #27072] To: Szabolcs Nagy Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" 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: "H.J. Lu via Libc-alpha" Reply-To: "H.J. Lu" Cc: GNU C Library Errors-To: libc-alpha-bounces@sourceware.org Sender: "Libc-alpha" On Wed, Jan 20, 2021 at 4:38 AM Szabolcs Nagy wrote: > > The 01/20/2021 08:29, Adhemerval Zanella wrote: > > On 19/01/2021 18:38, H.J. Lu wrote: > > > On Tue, Jan 19, 2021 at 12:16 PM Adhemerval Zanella > > > wrote: > > >> On 19/01/2021 16:41, H.J. Lu wrote: > > >>> Linker must be fixed to support static PIE: > > >>> > > >>> https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22269 > > >>> https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22263 > > >>> https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21252 > > >> > > >> My question is which is the correct way to check at configure time > > >> for this support? Currently this patchset added the PI_STATIC_AND_HIDDEN, > > >> which is set by each configure snipper within glibc. > > > > > > Add and define SUPPORT_STATIC_PIE for x86 and aarch64. Other > > > targets can opt-in. > > > > I was expecting a way without an extra flag, but I think for now it > > should be suffice. > > i can add the flag but when a target adds support there > will be no check if the used linker is new enough. The minimum link should work for x86 and aarch64. But if linker fixes are needed for other targets, they should add the linker check. -- H.J.