[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [SCM] glibc maintenance branch, t/hooks, created. glibc-2.12-869-g56

From: Samuel Thibault
Subject: Re: [SCM] glibc maintenance branch, t/hooks, created. glibc-2.12-869-g56798c4
Date: Fri, 11 May 2012 01:32:52 +0200
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.21+34 (58baf7c9f32f) (2010-12-30)

Thomas Schwinge, le Thu 10 May 2012 18:09:03 +0800, a écrit :
> How did this work before, though?

I'd say it didn't.

> Due to __symbol_set_attribute
> specifying weak linkage for the static case, I can see why we didn't get
> undefined symbol errors when linking for the static case, but what about
> the dynamic case?  (And that'd mean the whole loop just was a no-op
> before, right?)


> Did you find this while working on a specific problem?

I don't remember exactly, it's actually an old commit in my tree.

> Also, what about data_set_element which is only used in hurd/dtable.c for
> _hurd_fork_locks, which is manually run through twice in
> sysdeps/mach/hurd/fork.c, but which I can't find start and stop markers
> being defined for?

data_set_element is something else apparently, but it seems it needs the
same treatment indeed (I had only had a look at the hooks).

> And, might something like that in fact be responsible for the issue I had
> already seen months ago, but have just earlier today finally posted as
> <http://www.bddebian.com:8888/~hurd-web/open_issues/fork_deadlock/>?


> Lastly, _hurd_fork_setup_hook is only defined but never used, it seems.

Possibly a leftover or place for future use, I guess.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]