Mirror of the gdb-patches mailing list
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Ulrich Weigand" <uweigand@de.ibm.com>
To: brobecker@adacore.com (Joel Brobecker)
Cc: teawater@gmail.com (Hui Zhu),
	gdb-patches@sourceware.org (gdb-patches ml),
	        msnyder@vmware.com (Michael Snyder)
Subject: Re: [RFA] Check solib bfd arch
Date: Fri, 18 Sep 2009 12:50:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <200909181250.n8ICoMmD010948@d12av02.megacenter.de.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090917225633.GA29769@adacore.com> from "Joel Brobecker" at Sep 17, 2009 03:56:33 PM

Joel Brobecker wrote:

> I now see:
> 
>     (gdb) run
>     Starting program: /[...]/sparc64/ex/task_switch 
>     warning: `/usr/platform/SUNW,Sun-Fire-V440/lib/sparcv9/libc_psr.so.1': Shared library architecture sparc:v9a is not compatible with target architecture sparc:v9.
> 
> > +  if (b->compatible (b, bfd_get_arch_info (abfd)) != b)
> 
> In my case, b->compatible is bfd_default_compatible. the architecture
> is set to sparc:v9, and the shared library's architecture is sparc:v9a.
> The problem is that b->compatible is returning the architecture that
> is "more featureful" of the two, which in this case is sparc:v9a.
> As a result, we emit the warning.
> 
> Looks to me like the check is too aggressive and should be changed
> to == 0. Would that be correct?

Well, the check is modeled after the one in osabi.c:can_run_code_for
which carries the comment:

  /* BFD's 'A->compatible (A, B)' functions return zero if A and B are
     incompatible.  But if they are compatible, it returns the 'more
     featureful' of the two arches.  That is, if A can run code
     written for B, but B can't run code written for A, then it'll
     return A.

In your particular case, the result of compatible appears to indicate
that the target architecture sparc:v9 *cannot* run code written for
the architecture sparc:v9a; if this were true (I'm not sure about 
such sparc architecture details), then it would be correct to reject
those shared libraries ...

In any case, I do not think the checks in osabi.c (for the main
executable) and in solib.c (for shared libraries) should be different.

Hui Zhu wrote:

> Could you please try it with "bfd_arch_rs6000 and bfd_arch_powerpc"?
> Or Ulrich, maybe you can help us with it.  :)

Unfortunately, I don't have access to an old-style RS/6000 machine
myself ...

Bye,
Ulrich

-- 
  Dr. Ulrich Weigand
  GNU Toolchain for Linux on System z and Cell BE
  Ulrich.Weigand@de.ibm.com


  parent reply	other threads:[~2009-09-18 12:50 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-07-03  9:52 Hui Zhu
2009-07-05 21:36 ` Ulrich Weigand
2009-07-06  3:03   ` Hui Zhu
2009-07-07 16:45     ` Ulrich Weigand
2009-07-08  2:46       ` Hui Zhu
2009-07-09 13:43         ` Ulrich Weigand
2009-07-09 16:50           ` Hui Zhu
2009-09-17 22:56         ` Joel Brobecker
2009-09-18  5:05           ` Hui Zhu
2009-09-18 12:50           ` Ulrich Weigand [this message]
2009-09-18 13:06             ` Ulrich Weigand
2009-09-18 13:10             ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2009-09-18 14:24               ` Joel Brobecker
2009-09-18 14:08             ` Mark Kettenis
2009-09-18 14:11               ` Mark Kettenis
2009-09-18 14:39               ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2009-09-18 14:53                 ` Pedro Alves
2009-09-18 16:14                   ` Ulrich Weigand
2009-09-18 16:25                     ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2009-09-18 16:41                       ` Pedro Alves
2009-09-18 16:44                         ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2009-09-18 16:45                         ` Pedro Alves
2009-09-18 17:17                           ` Joel Brobecker
2009-09-18 20:43                             ` Joel Brobecker
2009-09-22 23:04           ` Joel Brobecker

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=200909181250.n8ICoMmD010948@d12av02.megacenter.de.ibm.com \
    --to=uweigand@de.ibm.com \
    --cc=brobecker@adacore.com \
    --cc=gdb-patches@sourceware.org \
    --cc=msnyder@vmware.com \
    --cc=teawater@gmail.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox