[Pixman] mips* asm exports symbols that should not export
siarhei.siamashka at gmail.com
Thu Dec 19 19:14:53 PST 2013
On Thu, 19 Dec 2013 19:08:26 +0200
Siarhei Siamashka <siarhei.siamashka at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 19 Dec 2013 17:21:16 +0100
> "Nemanja Lukic" <nemanja.lukic at rt-rk.com> wrote:
> > Hi YunQiang Su,
> > Attached is solution for unwanted symbol visibility.
> > I'll upstream both patches soon.
> > diff --git a/pixman/pixman-mips-dspr2-asm.h b/pixman/pixman-mips-dspr2-asm.h
> > index cab122d..718737e 100644
> > --- a/pixman/pixman-mips-dspr2-asm.h
> > +++ b/pixman/pixman-mips-dspr2-asm.h
> > @@ -71,6 +71,7 @@
> > */
> > #define LEAF_MIPS32R2(symbol) \
> > .globl symbol; \
> > + .hidden symbol; \
> > .align 2; \
> > .type symbol, @function; \
> > .ent symbol, 0; \
> From "info as":
> 7.59 `.hidden NAMES'
> This is one of the ELF visibility directives. The other two are
> `.internal' (*note `.internal': Internal.) and `.protected' (*note
> `.protected': Protected.).
> This directive overrides the named symbols default visibility (which
> is set by their binding: local, global or weak). The directive sets
> the visibility to `hidden' which means that the symbols are not visible
> to other components. Such symbols are always considered to be
> `protected' as well.
> This is an ELF-specific directive. ARM assembly code encloses this
> directive in "#ifdef __ELF__" to be on a safe side. Are there any
> possible MIPS targets using non-ELF object file format?
In any case, the addition of the .hidden attribute looks like a good
fix to me (with or without the additional __ELF__ guard check).
I guess the non-ELF MIPS systems might be all extinct by now:
Thanks for the patch.
More information about the Pixman