Re: Add private syscalls to support NPTL
Finn Thain wrote:
On Wed, 28 Oct 2009, Maxim Kuvyrkov wrote:
...
We [CodeSourcery] have just updated all of our toolchains, and the
GNU/Linux toolchain is based on EGLIBC 2.10 and has well tested TLS/NPTL
support. If you are targeting ColdFire you can simply download the
toolchain at <http://www.codesourcery.com/sgpp/lite/coldfire>.
...
I did run into a problem with this second patch. It doesn't apply to the
eglibc_2.10 branch in svn as of yesterday. The following hunk is the
problem:
The patches posted are all against FSF GLIBC, not EGLIBC, so some
conflicts are expected.
...
Using the above patches, I am almost able to compile eglibc_2.10. But
there is an old build failure (since glibc-2.4 I think) when linking
libc.so:
/tmp/build/glibc-m68k-linux-gnu-3/libc_pic.os: In function `fchownat': (.text+0x911c2): undefined reference to `__atfct_seterrno'
/tmp/gcc-4.4.1/lib/gcc/m68k-linux-gnu/4.4.1/../../../../m68k-linux-gnu/bin/ld: /tmp/build/glibc-m68k-linux-gnu-3/libc.so: hidden symbol `__atfct_seterrno' isn't defined
/tmp/gcc-4.4.1/lib/gcc/m68k-linux-gnu/4.4.1/../../../../m68k-linux-gnu/bin/ld: final link failed: Nonrepresentable section on output
collect2: ld returned 1 exit status
make[1]: *** [/tmp/build/glibc-m68k-linux-gnu-3/libc.so] Error 1
make[1]: Leaving directory `/tmp/build/glibc-2.10.1'
make: *** [all] Error 2
To try to fix this issue, I've basically copied this patch:
http://sources.redhat.com/ml/libc-hacker/2006-08/msg00004.html
An m68k version is attached. Can someone have a look at it and tell
whether this is the correct fix or not?
I don't really know, this is the first time I see this failure.
The end result is that I now have a NPTL/TLS m68k toolchain
(binutils-2.19.51 and patched gcc-4.4.1). Thank you for making that
possible. I've not run the test suites yet, but so far it seems to work.
Only, I did find that a statically linked binary (pccardctl) built with
this toolchain segfaults ("unknown errorSegmentation fault") when run
under a linux-2.6.31 kernel that lacks your patches. Is this expected?
The binary will certainly not work, but I remember run-time linker
gracefully exiting with a proper error message when invoked on a system
with unpatched kernel. I don't think I tested statically linked
binaries on such system.
--
Maxim Kuvyrkov
CodeSourcery
maxim@codesourcery.com
(650) 331-3385 x724
Reply to: