From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Jan 28 15:45:26 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 30513ABD for ; Mon, 28 Jan 2013 15:45:26 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from marius@alchemy.franken.de) Received: from alchemy.franken.de (alchemy.franken.de [194.94.249.214]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BE0A96A0 for ; Mon, 28 Jan 2013 15:45:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: from alchemy.franken.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by alchemy.franken.de (8.14.5/8.14.5/ALCHEMY.FRANKEN.DE) with ESMTP id r0SFjHnl059510; Mon, 28 Jan 2013 16:45:17 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from marius@alchemy.franken.de) Received: (from marius@localhost) by alchemy.franken.de (8.14.5/8.14.5/Submit) id r0SFjHKJ059509; Mon, 28 Jan 2013 16:45:17 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from marius) Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2013 16:45:17 +0100 From: Marius Strobl To: Konstantin Belousov Subject: Re: Fast gettimeofday(2) and static linking Message-ID: <20130128154516.GA59472@alchemy.franken.de> References: <20130125123554.GQ2522@kib.kiev.ua> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20130125123554.GQ2522@kib.kiev.ua> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Cc: current@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2013 15:45:26 -0000 On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 02:35:54PM +0200, Konstantin Belousov wrote: > Bruce Evans reported that statically linked binaries on HEAD an stable/9 > use the syscall for gettimeofday(2) and clock_gettime(2). Apparently, this > is due to my use of the weak reference to the __vdso* symbols in the > libc implementations. > > Patch below reworks the __vdso* attributes to only make the symbols > weak, but keep the references strong. Since I have to add a stub for > each architecture, I would like to ask non-x86 machines owners to test > the patch. > Hi Konstantin, what's the appropriate way to test this? Marius