This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the binutils project.
Re: ld-auto-import memory bug fixing
- To: "Ralf Habacker" <Ralf dot Habacker at freenet dot de>
- Subject: Re: ld-auto-import memory bug fixing
- From: Nick Clifton <nickc at cambridge dot redhat dot com>
- Date: 14 Sep 2001 14:41:09 +0100
- Cc: "Binutils" <binutils at sources dot redhat dot com>
- References: <000f01c13a93$c10972f0$651c440a@BRAMSCHE>
> 1. I recognized, that for any input file read by bfd one symboltab
> is present, not one for any section. Isn't it ?
Err, I do not think that this is quite right. For example dynamic
sections have their own symbol table, seperate from the normal symbol
> The best thing, I think, is in using the bfd structure to hold a
> pointer to the cached canonicalized bfd symbol table. I've found a
> bfd struct member called "usrdata" which was used by ldlang.c, which
> seems to hold ld specific data relating to bfd's in a
> lang_input_statement_type struct
> My question currently is which the better is, adding members to this
> struct or to add additional members to the bfd struct.
I would suggest keeping the number of changes to BFD small and so
using usrdata to point to your own structure.
> I have to say one limitation to this. Such cached symbol tables
> should not be manipulated. They should be used only read only. Is
> this real ?
Unless you want to modify large parts of bfd then I would say yes.