Re: switching ARC to 64-bit time_t (Re: [RFC v6 07/23] RISC-V: Use 64-bit time_t and off_t for RV32 and RV64)
- To: Joseph Myers <joseph@codesourcery.com>
- Cc: Andreas Schwab <schwab@suse.de>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>, Florian Weimer <fweimer@redhat.com>, Helmut Grohne <helmutg@debian.org>, GNU C Library <libc-alpha@sourceware.org>, Vineet Gupta <Vineet.Gupta1@synopsys.com>, Palmer Dabbelt <palmerdabbelt@google.com>, Zong Li <zongbox@gmail.com>, <debian-arm@lists.debian.org>, Alistair Francis <alistair.francis@wdc.com>, Adhemerval Zanella <adhemerval.zanella@linaro.org>, "Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@wdc.com>, Alistair Francis <alistair23@gmail.com>, arcml <linux-snps-arc@lists.infradead.org>
- Subject: Re: switching ARC to 64-bit time_t (Re: [RFC v6 07/23] RISC-V: Use 64-bit time_t and off_t for RV32 and RV64)
- From: Lukasz Majewski <lukma@denx.de>
- Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2020 17:28:25 +0100
- Message-id: <[🔎] 20200226172825.6795d999@jawa>
- In-reply-to: <[🔎] alpine.DEB.2.21.2002261445500.5707@digraph.polyomino.org.uk>
- References: <cover.1578824547.git.alistair.francis@wdc.com> <00574bfb-981a-3a1c-cbdf-b2fee4eddc32@gmail.com> <CAKmqyKMyf2psPp+-EHoidvbPbSXv0=dP26GjVQnT5BUriLc1gA@mail.gmail.com> <alpine.DEB.2.21.2002120123230.3988@digraph.polyomino.org.uk> <CAKmqyKOgFRfMOws_-48GqMnuS3ygmN9A4DzLg6UtEjRXVoM82A@mail.gmail.com> <8a9784b3-fc52-adc3-4595-33142b059388@synopsys.com> <20200220001136.2f14236e@jawa> <[🔎] CAK8P3a1b73K+RjfHONWLy_dFUucXxwd+0jTnHmkf6YqwRjit4w@mail.gmail.com> <[🔎] 20200220103716.2f526933@jawa> <[🔎] CAK8P3a2n6fRm4C5Ywyk5ys92jSOAc5SwvBVZyFOY9=4rB2pyjw@mail.gmail.com> <[🔎] 20200224100051.2511d797@jawa> <[🔎] mvmpne4xqpb.fsf@suse.de> <[🔎] 20200224111424.33759b2e@jawa> <[🔎] mvmh7zgxozs.fsf@suse.de> <[🔎] 20200224113658.275ea702@jawa> <[🔎] alpine.DEB.2.21.2002242353570.23654@digraph.polyomino.org.uk> <[🔎] 20200225123945.10ec1c25@jawa> <[🔎] alpine.DEB.2.21.2002251427240.25788@digraph.polyomino.org.uk> <[🔎] 20200226141842.652ebbcc@jawa> <[🔎] alpine.DEB.2.21.2002261445500.5707@digraph.polyomino.org.uk>
Hi Joseph,
> On Wed, 26 Feb 2020, Lukasz Majewski wrote:
>
> > > > hidden_def (__mq_timedsend)
> > > > weak_alias (__mq_timedsend, mq_timedsend) [**]
> > > > hidden_weak (mq_timedsend)
> > >
> > > If you have lib<name>_hidden_weak note you also need a
> > > corresponding lib<name>_hidden_proto, for the name of the weak
> > > alias. But you probably don't need to have lib<name>_hidden* for
> > > the weak alias at all, just make sure internal calls use the
> > > internal name.
> >
> > As fair as I can tell the weak_alias () is necessary for correct
> > operation of mq_timedsend when external programs call it.
>
> I wasn't commenting on the weak_alias call, but on the hidden_weak
> one.
Ach... indeed - sorry for misunderstanding.
>
> If you have hidden_weak (mq_timedsend), you also need
> lib<name>_hidden_proto (mq_timedsend) in the internal header (and
> vice versa, hidden_proto implies you need hidden_weak).
>
> You don't need hidden_weak (mq_timedsend) unless there is an
> *internal call to mq_timedsend from within the same library that
> defines it*.
>
> Since such an internal call could just use __mq_timedsend instead,
> you probably don't need hidden_weak / hidden_proto for mq_timedsend.
>
> (If you don't have an internal call to __mq_timedsend, you don't need
> the hidden_* for that name either.)
>
Thanks for the explanation.
Best regards,
Lukasz Majewski
--
DENX Software Engineering GmbH, Managing Director: Wolfgang Denk
HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany
Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-59 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: lukma@denx.de
Attachment:
pgpL0TXouBXSV.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Reply to: