[T106][ZXW-22]7520V3SCV2.01.01.02P42U09_VEC_V0.8_AP_VEC origin source commit
Change-Id: Ic6e05d89ecd62fc34f82b23dcf306c93764aec4b
diff --git a/ap/libc/glibc/glibc-2.22/elf/tst-tls16.c b/ap/libc/glibc/glibc-2.22/elf/tst-tls16.c
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..b3519858
--- /dev/null
+++ b/ap/libc/glibc/glibc-2.22/elf/tst-tls16.c
@@ -0,0 +1,52 @@
+#include <dlfcn.h>
+#include <stdio.h>
+
+static int
+do_test (void)
+{
+ void *h = dlopen ("tst-tlsmod16a.so", RTLD_LAZY | RTLD_GLOBAL);
+ if (h == NULL)
+ {
+ puts ("unexpectedly failed to open tst-tlsmod16a.so");
+ exit (1);
+ }
+
+ void *p = dlsym (h, "tlsvar");
+
+ /* This dlopen should indeed fail, because tlsvar was assigned to
+ dynamic TLS, and the new module requests it to be in static TLS.
+ However, there's a possibility that dlopen succeeds if the
+ variable is, for whatever reason, assigned to static TLS, or if
+ the module fails to require static TLS, or even if TLS is not
+ supported. */
+ h = dlopen ("tst-tlsmod16b.so", RTLD_NOW | RTLD_GLOBAL);
+ if (h == NULL)
+ {
+ return 0;
+ }
+
+ puts ("unexpectedly succeeded to open tst-tlsmod16b.so");
+
+
+ void *(*fp) (void) = (void *(*) (void)) dlsym (h, "in_dso");
+ if (fp == NULL)
+ {
+ puts ("cannot find in_dso");
+ exit (1);
+ }
+
+ /* If the dlopen passes, at least make sure the address returned by
+ dlsym is the same as that returned by the initial-exec access.
+ If the variable was assigned to dynamic TLS during dlsym, this
+ portion will fail. */
+ if (fp () != p)
+ {
+ puts ("returned values do not match");
+ exit (1);
+ }
+
+ return 0;
+}
+
+#define TEST_FUNCTION do_test ()
+#include "../test-skeleton.c"