Date: Wed, 19 Aug 2015 23:04:02 -0400 From: Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org> To: musl@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: SuperH conflict of arch/sh/__set_thread_area vs thread/__set_thread_area On Thu, Aug 20, 2015 at 02:44:11AM +0200, Christian Lamparter wrote: > Hello, > > I'm trying to add a port for a SH4-like ARCH to OpenWRT, which uses the latest > musl-1.1.10 as the default libc. I'm having the following problem when building > the toolchain: > > During the final linker-step, the symbol "__set_thread_area" declared twice. > This is because the SH architecture provides a separate __set_thread_area , > (other archs use the standard syscall wrapper from ). > > Obviously, I want this issue fixed. However I'm new to SuperH and musl, that's > why I need advise :-D. For now, I defined the src/thread/__set_thread_area as > a weak symbol. Now, that's just a crude hack, what would be better solution? > (I can make and post the patch if necessary - But sadly, I can't test it on the > hardware yet)? Bobby Bingham's reply explains what the issue is. Did you make a new arch name rather than using the existing sh arch for your port? If it's ABI-compatible, it would probably make more sense to use the existing one and extend it to support your hardware. I'm working on an sh-related project right now (see http://0pf.org/j-core.html) and one of my goals is to get sh more unified as a platform where it's possible to have binaries for the baseline ISA that work on lots of different hardware models (including nommu ones). Rich
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.