Message ID | 20161221230605.28638-16-rth@twiddle.net |
---|---|
State | New |
Headers | show |
On Wed, 21 Dec 2016, Richard Henderson wrote:
> All other memchr implementations define it.
But since memchr is a C90 function (so there are no external-linkage
namespace issues), and not used in any macros defined in installed headers
(so no block-scope namespace issues), is there any actual use for
__memchr, or should all the implementations just define memchr and not
__memchr?
On 12/21/2016 04:25 PM, Joseph Myers wrote: > On Wed, 21 Dec 2016, Richard Henderson wrote: > >> All other memchr implementations define it. > > But since memchr is a C90 function (so there are no external-linkage > namespace issues), and not used in any macros defined in installed headers > (so no block-scope namespace issues), is there any actual use for > __memchr, or should all the implementations just define memchr and not > __memchr? > It's an excellent question. As best I can tell, __memchr is no longer used (or was never used -- it's hard to tell) at all. Probably it should be purged from all of the implementations. r~
diff --git a/sysdeps/arm/armv6t2/memchr.S b/sysdeps/arm/armv6t2/memchr.S index ded52dc..b4117fe 100644 --- a/sysdeps/arm/armv6t2/memchr.S +++ b/sysdeps/arm/armv6t2/memchr.S @@ -184,4 +184,6 @@ ENTRY(memchr) DO_RET(lr) END(memchr) + +strong_alias (memchr, __memchr) libc_hidden_builtin_def (memchr)