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? Alexander
