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=-4.2 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 A78E41F8C6 for ; Tue, 3 Aug 2021 20:22:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: from server2.sourceware.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7EB343858427 for ; Tue, 3 Aug 2021 20:22:23 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 7EB343858427 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sourceware.org; s=default; t=1628022143; bh=HsTrZwnzmbcXV88gPNZYOouaR26USd9v78gfJ+a7nOI=; 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=Xpr95+jvtmxZqvbRjftygImZvKiv6uDblTwUzEA/mCgc7CwB5kHQeUuJptZnrgxSQ dVf+N1SwiVaEQ7MdJNoA6nm2S1JP0fLX5VJlg0cYhAWZxkOIvvjsXAjyl8qsVTrhS2 NXbk5shRzbG2ET1CjkaN+nxlq4cLcbeoeijM61Oc= Received: from mail-pj1-x102f.google.com (mail-pj1-x102f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::102f]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A9F113858C27 for ; Tue, 3 Aug 2021 20:22:03 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org A9F113858C27 Received: by mail-pj1-x102f.google.com with SMTP id nh14so19442587pjb.2 for ; Tue, 03 Aug 2021 13:22:03 -0700 (PDT) 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=HsTrZwnzmbcXV88gPNZYOouaR26USd9v78gfJ+a7nOI=; b=ZhRByTT+BlAvedIONfc2F0bdBm7+daw9jfKA0K50OfCU28+0VNWxYrdxX8LFiKXF8l JeimFYPOPKwHM3rmtdpmtBbWS1Dh0IXMVycGmXKz2bcQwfRYnaN2wZF/6cvJ55mFipaW MTu5m30gEmbYMUIknKzaOF/TJzOqDLRG6pQSk0YsGj/BLIqdnKUcH5RxvUWBc3u3CGBL nMBXA+0HhKh0D3pVGUt1YE2NBImT7Ek0afiCi69Ti45PGPeWgSWJDloGw3HBq818Xj3p O5W+1d6cQ4FtWd8LrJCMSwT59ci62g4veOYdmMDZ6AA2IHIiEXTp75dZZwphouq35CVd r+kw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531Hxgu31cF9hqFL41CqRYiuhsEVDKEM8/kfqcZ4caRjnFBAUkEb E7OhUdQmxo2cDjz7XlYHDpN4nDL3eIum/svE8jI= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwfccoBmKpp41JuwMqh89QAi9na5HJDrN6q7y8+SVrV+mkr9lwWT8rIYUv1ebDvrzq8nXGUwvpEkWYWDf0+dzc= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6a00:2490:b029:3bb:2cb3:25dc with SMTP id c16-20020a056a002490b02903bb2cb325dcmr13931484pfv.48.1628022122741; Tue, 03 Aug 2021 13:22:02 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20210727173958.GB1633923@zorba> <20210728154408.GF1633923@zorba> <20210728190211.GJ1633923@zorba> <87o8agto7v.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com> <20210803163917.GU1633923@zorba> <87mtpyfldl.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com> <87pmuue175.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <87pmuue175.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com> Date: Tue, 3 Aug 2021 13:21:26 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: RFC: Add DT_GNU_DEBUG To: Florian Weimer 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: 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 3, 2021 at 1:13 PM Florian Weimer wrote: > > * H. J. Lu: > > > No, copy relocation doesn't work: > > > > https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28130 > > > > I want to get rid of copy relocation and keep _r_debug only for existing > > broken binaries. The new interface will provide an access function to > > get the address of internal data in ld.so. > > Surely we can update both copies?! They exist today, so I don't expect > new problems from a tools perspective. > Why should we do that? We don't do that for errno. -- H.J.