various nptl patches

[Timo Teräs]

Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
>> Timo Teräs <timo.teras at gmail.com> wrote on 2010/04/17 12:09:22:
>>> Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
>>>>> Finally looked at the ldso patch and I am not entirely happy with it.
>>>>> I think the general structure should be different to make it easier
>>>>> to follow the code and port it to other archs. I can probably
>>>>> take a stab at it during the weekend but I have no env. to test in
>>>>> so I will have to do it blindly.
>>>> So this is what I came up with. I do wonder if not linux_resolver
>>>> need PROTECTED support too? Have you tested with LAZY relocation too?
>>> Have not tested lazy yet.
>>
>> The LAZY relocs is a bigger problem though. That has to work so it would be great if
>> you could test that too.
> 
> Hi Timo, did you get a chance to test LAZY relocs too? Now that
> NPTL is in main line it would be good to know if PROTECTED works
> as is or if more work is needed.

Tested them now. LAZY works as expected too.

- Timo