First batch of fixes

- Incompatible function type for ifunc alias
- Multiple statements macro expansion in strftime
- if_nametoindex size checking

Signed-off-by: Alexey Neyman <stilor@att.net>

config/libc/glibc.in

@@ -112,6 +112,12 @@ config GLIBC_HAS_OBSOLETE_RPC
     def_bool y
     depends on GLIBC_2_14_or_later
 
+# New GCC versions don't like the ifunc implementation in GCC, producing a warning.
+# We can either require old GCC for those versions, or disable erroring out on warnings.
+config GLIBC_HAS_NEW_IFUNC
+    def_bool y
+    depends on GLIBC_2_25_or_later
+
 config GLIBC_EXTRA_CONFIG_ARRAY
     string
     prompt "extra config"

packages/glibc-linaro/2.20-2014.11/0011-strftime-multiple-stmts.patch

@@ -0,0 +1,73 @@
+commit e4043b84c49e1cf9bcf1e8320233343ecc34f8eb
+Author: Joseph Myers <joseph@codesourcery.com>
+Date:   Tue Jun 27 17:12:13 2017 +0000
+
+    Fix strftime build with GCC 8.
+
+    Building with current GCC mainline fails with:
+
+    strftime_l.c: In function '__strftime_internal':
+    strftime_l.c:719:4: error: macro expands to multiple statements [-Werror=multistatement-macros]
+        digits = d > width ? d : width;          \
+        ^
+    strftime_l.c:1260:6: note: in expansion of macro 'DO_NUMBER'
+          DO_NUMBER (1, tp->tm_year + TM_YEAR_BASE);
+          ^~~~~~~~~
+    strftime_l.c:1259:4: note: some parts of macro expansion are not guarded by this 'else' clause
+        else
+        ^~~~
+
+    In fact this particular instance is harmless; the code looks like:
+
+              if (modifier == L_('O'))
+                goto bad_format;
+              else
+                DO_NUMBER (1, tp->tm_year + TM_YEAR_BASE);
+
+    and because of the goto, it doesn't matter that part of the expansion
+    isn't under the "else" conditional.  But it's also clearly bad style
+    to rely on that.  This patch changes DO_NUMBER and DO_NUMBER_SPACEPAD
+    to use do { } while (0) to avoid such problems.
+
+    Tested (full testsuite) for x86_64 (GCC 6), and with
+    build-many-glibcs.py with GCC mainline, in conjunction with my libgcc
+    patch <https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-06/msg02032.html>.
+
+            * time/strftime_l.c (DO_NUMBER): Define using do { } while (0).
+            (DO_NUMBER_SPACEPAD): Likewise.
+
+---
+ time/strftime_l.c |   22 ++++++++++++++++------
+ 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
+
+--- a/time/strftime_l.c
++++ b/time/strftime_l.c
+@@ -738,12 +738,22 @@
+       format_char = *f;
+       switch (format_char)
+ 	{
+-#define DO_NUMBER(d, v) \
+-	  digits = d > width ? d : width;				      \
+-	  number_value = v; goto do_number
+-#define DO_NUMBER_SPACEPAD(d, v) \
+-	  digits = d > width ? d : width;				      \
+-	  number_value = v; goto do_number_spacepad
++#define DO_NUMBER(d, v)				\
++	  do					\
++	    {					\
++	      digits = d > width ? d : width;	\
++	      number_value = v;			\
++	      goto do_number;			\
++	    }					\
++	  while (0)
++#define DO_NUMBER_SPACEPAD(d, v)		\
++	  do					\
++	    {					\
++	      digits = d > width ? d : width;	\
++	      number_value = v;			\
++	      goto do_number_spacepad;		\
++	    }					\
++	  while (0)
+
+ 	case L_('%'):
+ 	  if (modifier != 0)

packages/glibc-linaro/2.20-2014.11/0012-if_nametoindex-size-check.patch

@@ -0,0 +1,29 @@
+commit 2180fee114b778515b3f560e5ff1e795282e60b0
+Author: Steve Ellcey <sellcey@caviumnetworks.com>
+Date:   Wed Nov 15 08:58:48 2017 -0800
+
+    Check length of ifname before copying it into to ifreq structure.
+
+            [BZ #22442]
+            * sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/if_index.c (__if_nametoindex):
+            Check if ifname is too long.
+
+---
+ sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/if_index.c |    6 ++++++
+ 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
+
+--- a/sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/if_index.c
++++ b/sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/if_index.c
+@@ -43,6 +43,12 @@
+   if (fd < 0)
+     return 0;
+
++  if (strlen (ifname) >= IFNAMSIZ)
++    {
++      __set_errno (ENODEV);
++      return 0;
++    }
++
+   strncpy (ifr.ifr_name, ifname, sizeof (ifr.ifr_name));
+   if (__ioctl (fd, SIOCGIFINDEX, &ifr) < 0)
+     {

packages/glibc/2.12.1/0045-strftime-multiple-stmts.patch

@@ -0,0 +1,73 @@
+commit e4043b84c49e1cf9bcf1e8320233343ecc34f8eb
+Author: Joseph Myers <joseph@codesourcery.com>
+Date:   Tue Jun 27 17:12:13 2017 +0000
+
+    Fix strftime build with GCC 8.
+
+    Building with current GCC mainline fails with:
+
+    strftime_l.c: In function '__strftime_internal':
+    strftime_l.c:719:4: error: macro expands to multiple statements [-Werror=multistatement-macros]
+        digits = d > width ? d : width;          \
+        ^
+    strftime_l.c:1260:6: note: in expansion of macro 'DO_NUMBER'
+          DO_NUMBER (1, tp->tm_year + TM_YEAR_BASE);
+          ^~~~~~~~~
+    strftime_l.c:1259:4: note: some parts of macro expansion are not guarded by this 'else' clause
+        else
+        ^~~~
+
+    In fact this particular instance is harmless; the code looks like:
+
+              if (modifier == L_('O'))
+                goto bad_format;
+              else
+                DO_NUMBER (1, tp->tm_year + TM_YEAR_BASE);
+
+    and because of the goto, it doesn't matter that part of the expansion
+    isn't under the "else" conditional.  But it's also clearly bad style
+    to rely on that.  This patch changes DO_NUMBER and DO_NUMBER_SPACEPAD
+    to use do { } while (0) to avoid such problems.
+
+    Tested (full testsuite) for x86_64 (GCC 6), and with
+    build-many-glibcs.py with GCC mainline, in conjunction with my libgcc
+    patch <https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-06/msg02032.html>.
+
+            * time/strftime_l.c (DO_NUMBER): Define using do { } while (0).
+            (DO_NUMBER_SPACEPAD): Likewise.
+
+---
+ time/strftime_l.c |   22 ++++++++++++++++------
+ 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
+
+--- a/time/strftime_l.c
++++ b/time/strftime_l.c
+@@ -742,12 +742,22 @@
+       format_char = *f;
+       switch (format_char)
+ 	{
+-#define DO_NUMBER(d, v) \
+-	  digits = d > width ? d : width;				      \
+-	  number_value = v; goto do_number
+-#define DO_NUMBER_SPACEPAD(d, v) \
+-	  digits = d > width ? d : width;				      \
+-	  number_value = v; goto do_number_spacepad
++#define DO_NUMBER(d, v)				\
++	  do					\
++	    {					\
++	      digits = d > width ? d : width;	\
++	      number_value = v;			\
++	      goto do_number;			\
++	    }					\
++	  while (0)
++#define DO_NUMBER_SPACEPAD(d, v)		\
++	  do					\
++	    {					\
++	      digits = d > width ? d : width;	\
++	      number_value = v;			\
++	      goto do_number_spacepad;		\
++	    }					\
++	  while (0)
+
+ 	case L_('%'):
+ 	  if (modifier != 0)

packages/glibc/2.12.1/0046-if_nametoindex-size-check.patch

@@ -0,0 +1,29 @@
+commit 2180fee114b778515b3f560e5ff1e795282e60b0
+Author: Steve Ellcey <sellcey@caviumnetworks.com>
+Date:   Wed Nov 15 08:58:48 2017 -0800
+
+    Check length of ifname before copying it into to ifreq structure.
+
+            [BZ #22442]
+            * sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/if_index.c (__if_nametoindex):
+            Check if ifname is too long.
+
+---
+ sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/if_index.c |    6 ++++++
+ 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
+
+--- a/sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/if_index.c
++++ b/sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/if_index.c
+@@ -54,6 +54,12 @@
+   if (fd < 0)
+     return 0;
+
++  if (strlen (ifname) >= IFNAMSIZ)
++    {
++      __set_errno (ENODEV);
++      return 0;
++    }
++
+   strncpy (ifr.ifr_name, ifname, sizeof (ifr.ifr_name));
+   if (__ioctl (fd, SIOCGIFINDEX, &ifr) < 0)
+     {

packages/glibc/2.12.2/0008-strftime-multiple-stmts.patch

@@ -0,0 +1,73 @@
+commit e4043b84c49e1cf9bcf1e8320233343ecc34f8eb
+Author: Joseph Myers <joseph@codesourcery.com>
+Date:   Tue Jun 27 17:12:13 2017 +0000
+
+    Fix strftime build with GCC 8.
+
+    Building with current GCC mainline fails with:
+
+    strftime_l.c: In function '__strftime_internal':
+    strftime_l.c:719:4: error: macro expands to multiple statements [-Werror=multistatement-macros]
+        digits = d > width ? d : width;          \
+        ^
+    strftime_l.c:1260:6: note: in expansion of macro 'DO_NUMBER'
+          DO_NUMBER (1, tp->tm_year + TM_YEAR_BASE);
+          ^~~~~~~~~
+    strftime_l.c:1259:4: note: some parts of macro expansion are not guarded by this 'else' clause
+        else
+        ^~~~
+
+    In fact this particular instance is harmless; the code looks like:
+
+              if (modifier == L_('O'))
+                goto bad_format;
+              else
+                DO_NUMBER (1, tp->tm_year + TM_YEAR_BASE);
+
+    and because of the goto, it doesn't matter that part of the expansion
+    isn't under the "else" conditional.  But it's also clearly bad style
+    to rely on that.  This patch changes DO_NUMBER and DO_NUMBER_SPACEPAD
+    to use do { } while (0) to avoid such problems.
+
+    Tested (full testsuite) for x86_64 (GCC 6), and with
+    build-many-glibcs.py with GCC mainline, in conjunction with my libgcc
+    patch <https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-06/msg02032.html>.
+
+            * time/strftime_l.c (DO_NUMBER): Define using do { } while (0).
+            (DO_NUMBER_SPACEPAD): Likewise.
+
+---
+ time/strftime_l.c |   22 ++++++++++++++++------
+ 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
+
+--- a/time/strftime_l.c
++++ b/time/strftime_l.c
+@@ -742,12 +742,22 @@
+       format_char = *f;
+       switch (format_char)
+ 	{
+-#define DO_NUMBER(d, v) \
+-	  digits = d > width ? d : width;				      \
+-	  number_value = v; goto do_number
+-#define DO_NUMBER_SPACEPAD(d, v) \
+-	  digits = d > width ? d : width;				      \
+-	  number_value = v; goto do_number_spacepad
++#define DO_NUMBER(d, v)				\
++	  do					\
++	    {					\
++	      digits = d > width ? d : width;	\
++	      number_value = v;			\
++	      goto do_number;			\
++	    }					\
++	  while (0)
++#define DO_NUMBER_SPACEPAD(d, v)		\
++	  do					\
++	    {					\
++	      digits = d > width ? d : width;	\
++	      number_value = v;			\
++	      goto do_number_spacepad;		\
++	    }					\
++	  while (0)
+
+ 	case L_('%'):
+ 	  if (modifier != 0)

packages/glibc/2.12.2/0009-if_nametoindex-size-check.patch

@@ -0,0 +1,29 @@
+commit 2180fee114b778515b3f560e5ff1e795282e60b0
+Author: Steve Ellcey <sellcey@caviumnetworks.com>
+Date:   Wed Nov 15 08:58:48 2017 -0800
+
+    Check length of ifname before copying it into to ifreq structure.
+
+            [BZ #22442]
+            * sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/if_index.c (__if_nametoindex):
+            Check if ifname is too long.
+
+---
+ sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/if_index.c |    6 ++++++
+ 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
+
+--- a/sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/if_index.c
++++ b/sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/if_index.c
+@@ -54,6 +54,12 @@
+   if (fd < 0)
+     return 0;
+
++  if (strlen (ifname) >= IFNAMSIZ)
++    {
++      __set_errno (ENODEV);
++      return 0;
++    }
++
+   strncpy (ifr.ifr_name, ifname, sizeof (ifr.ifr_name));
+   if (__ioctl (fd, SIOCGIFINDEX, &ifr) < 0)
+     {

packages/glibc/2.13/0044-strftime-multiple-stmts.patch

@@ -0,0 +1,73 @@
+commit e4043b84c49e1cf9bcf1e8320233343ecc34f8eb
+Author: Joseph Myers <joseph@codesourcery.com>
+Date:   Tue Jun 27 17:12:13 2017 +0000
+
+    Fix strftime build with GCC 8.
+
+    Building with current GCC mainline fails with:
+
+    strftime_l.c: In function '__strftime_internal':
+    strftime_l.c:719:4: error: macro expands to multiple statements [-Werror=multistatement-macros]
+        digits = d > width ? d : width;          \
+        ^
+    strftime_l.c:1260:6: note: in expansion of macro 'DO_NUMBER'
+          DO_NUMBER (1, tp->tm_year + TM_YEAR_BASE);
+          ^~~~~~~~~
+    strftime_l.c:1259:4: note: some parts of macro expansion are not guarded by this 'else' clause
+        else
+        ^~~~
+
+    In fact this particular instance is harmless; the code looks like:
+
+              if (modifier == L_('O'))
+                goto bad_format;
+              else
+                DO_NUMBER (1, tp->tm_year + TM_YEAR_BASE);
+
+    and because of the goto, it doesn't matter that part of the expansion
+    isn't under the "else" conditional.  But it's also clearly bad style
+    to rely on that.  This patch changes DO_NUMBER and DO_NUMBER_SPACEPAD
+    to use do { } while (0) to avoid such problems.
+
+    Tested (full testsuite) for x86_64 (GCC 6), and with
+    build-many-glibcs.py with GCC mainline, in conjunction with my libgcc
+    patch <https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-06/msg02032.html>.
+
+            * time/strftime_l.c (DO_NUMBER): Define using do { } while (0).
+            (DO_NUMBER_SPACEPAD): Likewise.
+
+---
+ time/strftime_l.c |   22 ++++++++++++++++------
+ 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
+
+--- a/time/strftime_l.c
++++ b/time/strftime_l.c
+@@ -742,12 +742,22 @@
+       format_char = *f;
+       switch (format_char)
+ 	{
+-#define DO_NUMBER(d, v) \
+-	  digits = d > width ? d : width;				      \
+-	  number_value = v; goto do_number
+-#define DO_NUMBER_SPACEPAD(d, v) \
+-	  digits = d > width ? d : width;				      \
+-	  number_value = v; goto do_number_spacepad
++#define DO_NUMBER(d, v)				\
++	  do					\
++	    {					\
++	      digits = d > width ? d : width;	\
++	      number_value = v;			\
++	      goto do_number;			\
++	    }					\
++	  while (0)
++#define DO_NUMBER_SPACEPAD(d, v)		\
++	  do					\
++	    {					\
++	      digits = d > width ? d : width;	\
++	      number_value = v;			\
++	      goto do_number_spacepad;		\
++	    }					\
++	  while (0)
+
+ 	case L_('%'):
+ 	  if (modifier != 0)