On Wed, Nov 03, 2021 at 05:28:02PM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote:
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/bits/dlfcn_eh_frame.h
> @@ -0,0 +1,33 @@
> +/* System dependent definitions for find unwind information using ld.so.
> + Copyright (C) 2021 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
> + This file is part of the GNU C Library.
> +
> + The GNU C Library is free software; you can redistribute it and/or
> + modify it under the terms of the GNU Lesser General Public
> + License as published by the Free Software Foundation; either
> + version 2.1 of the License, or (at your option) any later version.
> +
> + The GNU C Library is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
> + but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
> + MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the GNU
> + Lesser General Public License for more details.
> +
> + You should have received a copy of the GNU Lesser General Public
> + License along with the GNU C Library; if not, see
> + <https://www.gnu.org/licenses/>. */
> +
> +#ifndef _DLFCN_H
> +# error "Never use <bits/dlfcn_eh_frame.h> directly; include <dlfcn.h>
> instead."
> +#endif
> +
> +/* This implementation does not use a DBASE pointer argument in
> + _dl_find_eh_frame. */
> +#define DL_FIND_EH_FRAME_DBASE 0
> +
> +__BEGIN_DECLS
> +/* If PC points into an object that has a PT_GNU_EH_FRAME segment,
> + return the pointer to the start of that segment in memory. If no
> + corresponding object exists or the object has no such segment,
> + returns NULL. */
> +void *_dl_find_eh_frame (void *__pc) __THROW;
> +__END_DECLS
dl_iterate_phdr is declared in link.h and without the _ prefix, shouldn't
dl_find_eh_frame follow the suit and be declared in the same header and
also without the prefix?
Also, shouldn't the DL_FIND_EH_FRAME_DBASE macro on the other side have
__ prefix? We have one DL_* macro, DL_CALL_FCT, so perhaps it is fine
for -D_GNU_SOURCE, but various other projects do use macros with DL_*
prefix, like boost or python.
Jakub
