Re: A testcase anad a patch for the __gmon_start__ problem on PPC.

["H . J . Lu" <hjl at lucon dot org>]

On Wed, Oct 11, 2000 at 12:08:16PM +0200, Franz Sirl wrote:
> At 05:46 11.10.00, H . J . Lu wrote:
> >On Tue, Oct 10, 2000 at 08:30:14PM -0700, H . J . Lu wrote:
> >
> > > to weak undefined. That is the same thing as __gmon_start__ on PPC. We
> > > don't see the problem on x86 since WEAK_GMON_START is defined for x86.
> > > Those 2 changes have no impact on x86 as far as __gmon_start__ is
> > > concerned. If we want the binary compatibility, we need to put back
> > > the weak defined __gmon_start__ for all targets where WEAK_GMON_START
> > > is not defined before. One way to fix it is to provide a PPC initfini.c.
> > >
> > >
> > > H.J.
> > > ---
> > > 2000-10-10  H.J. Lu  <hjl@gnu.org>
> > >
> > >       * sysdeps/powerpc/initfini.c: New. For the binary compatibility.
> >
> >My second thought, since only i386 defines WEAK_GMON_START before, it
> >seems that all but i386 are affected. Here is a new patch.
> 
> One question, are you 100% sure that this is no static/shared linker bug? I 

I am 99% sure.

> know that my testcase (and probably yours too) fails on x86 and PPC, but 
> succeeds on alpha (btw, can people try that on sparc/arm/m68k please?), 
> which makes me think we may work around a different problem here.
> 

I don't think so. You can call it an ABI bug if you want.


H.J.