On Wed, Sep 12, 2018 at 5:02 PM Alexander Monakov <amona...@ispras.ru> wrote: > > On Wed, 12 Sep 2018, Martin Liška wrote: > > I see, I'm attaching patch that does that. I can confirm your test-case > > works > > fine w/o -Wl,--dynamic-list-data. > > > > I'm wondering if it will work as well with dlopen/dlsym machinery? Or now > > the linker flag will be needed? > > No, for this issue dlopen doesn't pose extra complications as far as I know. > > > > Hm, this TLS change is attacking the issue from a wrong direction. What I > > > suggested on the Cauldron as a simple and backportable way of solving this > > > is to consolidate the two TLS variables into one TLS struct, which is then > > > either interposed or not as a whole. > > > > Got it, current I prefer the solution. > > Ack, I think this is a good way to solve the specific issue in the PR. > > I'd like to remind that the point of the PR was to draw attention to larger > design issues in libgcov. > > There's no decision on the topic of gcov.so. At the Cauldron I had the chance > to talk to you and Richi separately, but we didn't meet together. Would it > help if I started a new thread summarizing the current status from my point of > view?
Definitely. Richard. > Alexander
