Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

add non-neon support #1

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: jb4.2
Choose a base branch
from
Open

add non-neon support #1

wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

DJNoXD
Copy link

@DJNoXD DJNoXD commented Aug 14, 2013

Change-Id: Id827ae485354317bf99ae7c66a3792d871f2b88c
non-neon support for devices (e.g. lge p990)

Change-Id: Id827ae485354317bf99ae7c66a3792d871f2b88c
SlimAdmin pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 3, 2017
libcxx provides const-correct overloads for a few string.h functions.
These overloads use clang's enable_if attribute, so they're preferred
over our FORTIFY'ed equivalents.

This weakens _FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 when used with some of these functions,
since clang needs to see __pass_object_size in order to pass an accurate
result for __builtin_object_size(s, 1) at a callsite. Since those
functions don't have __pass_object_size on their params, clang can't do
that. This makes LLVM lower the __builtin_object_size calls, which means
we get the same result as __builtin_object_size(s, 0).

We have to provide all of the overloads in Bionic, since enable_if is
only used to disambiguate overloads with (otherwise) the same type. In
other words:

// overload 1
char *strchr(const char *, int s) __attribute__((enable_if(1, "")));
// overload 2
char *strchr(char *, int s);

void foo() {
  char cs[1] = {};
  strchr(static_cast<const char *>(cs), '\0'); // calls overload #1.
  strchr(cs, '\0'); // calls overload #2.
}

Bug: 34747525
Test: m checkbuild on bullhead internal master + AOSP. vts -m
BionicUnitTests passes on both. Surprisingly, the only code that this
seems to break is contained in Bionic.

Change-Id: Ie406f42fb3d1c5bf940dc857889876fc39b57c90
SlimAdmin pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 5, 2017
No-one cares about seeing "async_safe_fatal" (which you have to admit is a
pretty confusing name for an app developer anyway).

On arm:

     #00 pc 0001a43c  /system/lib/libc.so (abort+63)
     #1 pc 0001a627  /system/lib/libc.so (__assert+14)

And aarch64:

     #00 pc 000000000001d75c  /system/lib64/libc.so (abort+120)
     #1 pc 000000000001dad0  /system/lib64/libc.so (__assert+44)

Bug: N/A
Test: ran `crasher assert` and `crasher64 assert`
Change-Id: I00be71c566c74cdb00f8e95d634777155bc3da03
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant