On 24 May 2016 at 15:12, Rob Clark <robdcl...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 10:03 AM, Rob Clark <robdcl...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 9:47 AM, Rob Herring <r...@kernel.org> wrote: >>> On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 8:40 AM, Rob Clark <robdcl...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 9:17 AM, Ilia Mirkin <imir...@alum.mit.edu> wrote: >>>>> On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 9:15 AM, Rob Herring <r...@kernel.org> wrote: >>>>>> On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 8:09 AM, Ilia Mirkin <imir...@alum.mit.edu> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 9:06 AM, Rob Herring <r...@kernel.org> wrote: >>>>>>>> On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 4:57 AM, Emil Velikov >>>>>>>> <emil.l.veli...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>> From: Emil Velikov <emil.veli...@collabora.com> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Add weak symbol notation for the pthread_mutexattr* symbols, thus >>>>>>>>> making >>>>>>>>> the linker happy. When building with -O1 or greater the optimiser will >>>>>>>>> kick in and remove the said functions as they are dead/unreachable >>>>>>>>> code. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Ideally we'll enable the optimisations locally, yet that does not seem >>>>>>>>> to work atm. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Cc: Alejandro Piñeiro <apinhe...@igalia.com> >>>>>>>>> Cc: Ben Widawsky <b...@bwidawsk.net> >>>>>>>>> Cc: Ilia Mirkin <imir...@alum.mit.edu> >>>>>>>>> Cc: Mark Janes <mark.a.ja...@intel.com> >>>>>>>>> Cc: Rob Clark <robdcl...@gmail.com> >>>>>>>>> Cc: Rob Herring <r...@kernel.org> >>>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Emil Velikov <emil.veli...@collabora.com> >>>>>>>>> --- >>>>>>>>> Building with -Wall -Wextra -pedantic and it does not cause any >>>>>>>>> additional warnings/errors. >>>>>>>>> --- >>>>>>>>> include/c11/threads_posix.h | 26 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >>>>>>>>> 1 file changed, 26 insertions(+) >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> diff --git a/include/c11/threads_posix.h b/include/c11/threads_posix.h >>>>>>>>> index 11d36e4..61b7fab 100644 >>>>>>>>> --- a/include/c11/threads_posix.h >>>>>>>>> +++ b/include/c11/threads_posix.h >>>>>>>>> @@ -169,6 +169,32 @@ mtx_destroy(mtx_t *mtx) >>>>>>>>> pthread_mutex_destroy(mtx); >>>>>>>>> } >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> +/* >>>>>>>>> + * XXX: Workaround when building with -O0 and without pthreads link. >>>>>>>>> + * >>>>>>>>> + * In such cases constant folding and dead code elimination won't be >>>>>>>>> + * available, thus the compiler will always add the >>>>>>>>> pthread_mutexattr* >>>>>>>>> + * functions into the binary. As we try to link, we'll fail as the >>>>>>>>> + * symbols are unresolved. >>>>>>>>> + * >>>>>>>>> + * Ideally we'll enable the optimisations locally, yet that does not >>>>>>>>> + * seem to work. >>>>>>>>> + * >>>>>>>>> + * So the alternative workaround is to annotate the symbols as weak. >>>>>>>>> + * Thus the linker will be happy and things don't clash when building >>>>>>>>> + * with -O1 or greater. >>>>>>>>> + */ >>>>>>>>> +#ifdef HAVE_FUNC_ATTRIBUTE_WEAK >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Doesn't this need to get defined somewhere? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> See m4/ax_gcc_func_attribute.m4. >>>>>> >>>>>> Right, but then don't we need "AX_GCC_FUNC_ATTRIBUTE([weak])" added in >>>>>> configure.ac? Only the following are checked: >>>>>> >>>>>> configure.ac:AX_GCC_FUNC_ATTRIBUTE([const]) >>>>>> configure.ac:AX_GCC_FUNC_ATTRIBUTE([flatten]) >>>>>> configure.ac:AX_GCC_FUNC_ATTRIBUTE([format]) >>>>>> configure.ac:AX_GCC_FUNC_ATTRIBUTE([malloc]) >>>>>> configure.ac:AX_GCC_FUNC_ATTRIBUTE([packed]) >>>>>> configure.ac:AX_GCC_FUNC_ATTRIBUTE([pure]) >>>>>> configure.ac:AX_GCC_FUNC_ATTRIBUTE([returns_nonnull]) >>>>>> configure.ac:AX_GCC_FUNC_ATTRIBUTE([unused]) >>>>>> configure.ac:AX_GCC_FUNC_ATTRIBUTE([warn_unused_result]) >>>>> >>>>> Right :) Since Emil says he tested, must be some sort of error in his >>>>> testing procedure. Or he forgot to commit that file. >>>> >>>> hmm, even with the below hunk added, it isn't working for me.. I >>>> suspect Emil might need to double check his generated Makefiles to be >>>> sure they have -O0.. >>> >>> Strange. It fails for me so I have -O0, and I can add the weak attribs >>> w/o the ifdef and it works. >> >> and indeed, if I drop the #ifdef guard, it works.. >> > > ok, not really sure what is going on here.. I do end up w/ > -DHAVE_FUNC_ATTRIBUTE_WEAK=1 in generated makefiles, and reverted the > removal of ifdef guard and it is working still. Possibly it was just > that touching the header (originally deleting the ifdef guard) caused > something to get recompiled which didn't initially.. > The pendantic test was done as standalone (separate) test. The rest... I seems to have punched the wrong script during testing. The backburner is spinning with v2, and I'm keeping a closer eye on the results.
-Emil _______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
