Re: [PATCH] PPC libgcc compatibility

[Franz Sirl <Franz dot Sirl-kernel at lauterbach dot com>]

On Wednesday 15 May 2002 14:58, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Wed, May 15, 2002 at 02:50:53PM +0200, Franz Sirl wrote:
> > At 14:44 15.05.2002, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > >On Wed, May 15, 2002 at 02:41:59PM +0200, Franz Sirl wrote:
> > > > extern int64_t __fixdfdi (double);
> > > >
> > > > int64_t INTUSE (__fixdfdi) (double d)
> > > > {
> > > >    return __fixdfdi (d);
> > > > }
> > > > symbol_version (INTUSE (__fixdfdi), __fixdfdi, GLIBC_2.0);
> > >
> > >The linker won't let you do that I'm afraid.
> >
> > Really? I just tried it and glibc linked fine (binutils-2.12.90.0.7).
> > Which linker error would you expect?
>
> If it was the default version, linker would certainly not be happy at all,
> but apparently if it is non-default version, it might work.
> In that case, it would make sense to change the IA-64 bits the same way
> (though I think we should keep divdi3.c as it should be more efficient than
> what libgcc has). Currently e.g. __divtf3 is compiled into glibc twice
> on IA-64, once for the export and once hidden, since for the export it
> is not the default version and thus linker puts in libgcc.a too.

The appended patch against the branch works fine, but I noticed a new problem, 
since in gcc we have that for libgcc_s.so.1 in gcc/config/libgcc-glibc.ver:

%inherit GCC_3.0 GLIBC_2.0
GLIBC_2.0 {
  # Sampling of DImode arithmetic used by (at least) i386 and m68k.
  __divdi3
  __moddi3
  __udivdi3
  __umoddi3

Now ld complains when linking shared c++ libs :-(. Now, what can we do? Can I 
use GLIBC_2.1 as a version in glibc instead? Or maybe even a special 
GLIBC_COMPAT?

Franz.

Attachment: glibc-libgcc-compat-ppc-3.patch
Description: Text document