Re: Questions about --with-alpha and --with-armeb configure flags
The issues with specific arm platforms has been fixed via a previous patch
in the SVN, thus the lines,
+ TEST_I2S((t[i].s[0] == 'i' && t[i].s[1] >= '4' &&
t[i].s[1] <= '6'
+ && strcmp(t[i].s + 2, "86") == 0)
+ || strcmp(t[i].s, "armv5tejl") == 0
+ || strcmp(t[i].s, "armv6l") == 0
+ || strcmp(t[i].s, "armv7l") == 0);
shouldn't be needed, as far as I have tested (i.e., I tested it and it
works, but didn't do much more than run auditd/auditctl).
I don't believe there required commas are in place in machinetab.h to
allow for --with-armeb and --with-alpha to be compiled at the same
time.
Cheers,
Nathaniel
On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 12:21 PM, Miloslav Trmac <mitr(a)redhat.com> wrote:
----- Original Message -----
> > If I understand correctly it's only adding arch detection and syscall
> > tables to ausyscall. Why are these syscall table conditional?
>
> To reduce the number of text relocations in libaudit. Libaudit links
against a
> number of applications and text relocations eats memory and increases
startup
> time.
Is that really an issue with the current code? The gentab.c code was
designed to avoid text relocations.
At least on x86_64 (which, true, is especially well-designed for this),
there are no text relocations in libaudit nor libauparse, whether
--with-alpha or --with-armeb are used or not. In fact the number of
relocations of any kind is exactly the same in both cases.
Any one care to retest this on a different architecture, e.t. 32-bit x86?
FWIW, at least the attached patch was necessary to build with --with-alpha
--with-armeb.
Mirek
--
Linux-audit mailing list
Linux-audit(a)redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-audit
Attachments:
- attachment.html (text/html — 2.4 KB)